Cited by 47Emotion and Mood RecognitionFace recognition and analysisFace and Expression Recognition

Happiness level prediction with sequential inputs via multiple regressions

Li, Jianshu, Roy, Sujoy, Feng, Jiashi, Sim, Terence·2016·Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction

Abstract

This paper presents our solution submitted to the Emotion Recognition in the Wild (EmotiW 2016) group-level happiness intensity prediction sub-challenge. The objective of this sub-challenge is to predict the overall happiness level given an image of a group of people in a natural setting. We note that both the global setting and the faces of the individuals in the image influence the group-level happiness intensity of the image. Hence the challenge lies in building a solution that incorporates both these factors and also considers their right combination. Our proposed solution incorporates both these factors as a combination of global and local information. We use a convolutional neural network to extract discriminative face features, and a recurrent neural network to selectively memorize the important features to perform the group-level happiness prediction task. Experimental evaluations show promising performance improvements, resulting in Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) reduction of about 0.5 units on the test set compared to the baseline algorithm that uses only global information.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2993148.2997636

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Several challenge-winning studies choose to use both handcrafted and deep features, e.g., by score-level or model-level fusion of separate handcrafted and deep models.

    “However, several challenge-winning studies [95], [15], [17], choose to use both handcrafted and deep features, e.g., by scorelevel [95] or model-level [17] fusion of separate handcrafted and deep models.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, J., Roy, S., Feng, J., & Sim, T.
Affiliations
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • SAP, Singapore
Venue
Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction
Publisher
ACM
Published
2016-10-31
Pages
487-493
OpenAlex
W2548676029
Cited by
47
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 1
FWCI
11.57
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MULTIMODAL INTERACTION (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face recognition and analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face and Expression Recognition
Keywords
group image, facial features, local and global information, recurrent neural networks, convolutional neural networks, multiple linear regression

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