Cited by 33Emotion and Mood RecognitionEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology

Emotion assessment using Machine Learning and low-cost wearable devices

Laureanti, R., Bilucaglia, M., Zito, M., Circi, R., Fici, A., Rivetti, F., Valesi, R., Oldrini, C. +2 more·2020·2020 42nd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC)

Abstract

The advancement in bioelectrical measurement technologies and the push towards a higher impact of the Brain Computer Interfaces and Affective Computing in the daily life have made non-invasive and low-priced devices available to the large population to record physiological states. The aim of this study is the assessment of the abilities of the MUSE headband, together with the Shimmer GSR+ device, to assess the emotional state of people during stimuli exposure. Twenty-four pictures from the IAPS database were showed to 54 subjects and were evaluated in their emotional values by means of the Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM). Using a Machine Learning approach, fifty-two scalar features were extracted from the signals and used to train 6 binary classifiers to predict the valence and arousal elicited by each stimulus. In all classifiers we obtained accuracies ranging from 53.6% to 69.9%, confirming that these devices are able to give information about the emotional state.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/embc44109.2020.9175221

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Authors in [104] and [105] introduce TinyML as a medical embedded system for diagnosis of focal liver lesion (FLL) using a DNN model trained on liver images obtained using ultrasound imaging.

    “The authors in [104] and [105] introduce TinyML as a medical embedded system for the diagnosis of of focal liver lesion (FLL) using a DNN model trained on liver images that were priory obtained using ultrasound imaging.”

    From A Comprehensive Survey on TinyML (2023) · cites this paper as [105]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Laureanti, R., Bilucaglia, M., Zito, M., Circi, R., Fici, A., Rivetti, F., Valesi, R., Oldrini, C., Mainardi, L. T., & Russo, V.
Affiliations
  • Politecnico di Milano (IT)
  • IULM University (IT)
Venue
2020 42nd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2020-07
Volume
2020
Pages
576-579
ISSN
2375-7477 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3082775944
Cited by
33
References
24
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8
FWCI
6.08
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aisberg (University of Bergamo) (submittedVersion)
  • Virtual Community of Pathological Anatomy (University of Castilla La Mancha) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Keywords
emotion measurement, Muse headband, skin conductance, electrodermal activity, valence and arousal prediction, IAPS images, Self-Rating Manikin, low-cost wearable device, affective computing
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Wearable Electronic Devices, Arousal, Emotions, Humans, Brain-Computer Interfaces

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review