Cited by 44Emotion and Mood RecognitionSpeech and Audio ProcessingSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining

Modeling multimodal cues in a deep learning-based framework for emotion recognition in the wild

Open access
Pini, Stefano, Ahmed, Olfa Ben, Cornia, Marcella, Baraldi, Lorenzo, Cucchiara, Rita, Huet, Benoit·2017·Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a multimodal deep learning architecture for emotion recognition in video regarding our participation to the audio-video based sub-challenge of the Emotion Recognition in the Wild 2017 challenge. Our model combines cues from multiple video modalities, including static facial features, motion patterns related to the evolution of the human expression over time, and audio information. Specifically, it is composed of three sub-networks trained separately: the first and second ones extract static visual features and dynamic patterns through 2D and 3D Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN), while the third one consists in a pretrained audio network which is used to extract useful deep acoustic signals from video. In the audio branch, we also apply Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) networks in order to capture the temporal evolution of the audio features. To identify and exploit possible relationships among different modalities, we propose a fusion network that merges cues from the different modalities in one representation. The proposed architecture outperforms the challenge baselines (38.81 % and 40.47 %): we achieve an accuracy of 50.39 % and 49.92 % respectively on the validation and the testing data.

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 · 10.1145/3136755.3143006

Cites

49 of 49 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?

  • SoundNet, a 1D CNN trained with unlabeled video, has been shown to perform well in SER even without fine-tuning, and was featured in a challenge-winning submission.

    “SoundNet [138], a 1D CNN trained with unlabeled video, has been shown to perform well in SER even without fine-tuning [139], and was featured in a challenge-winning submission [17].”
  • In end-to-end training for spatial and temporal feature learning, the problem of limited labeled data becomes especially noticeable.

    “however in this setting the problem of limited labeled data becomes especially noticeable [63], [139].”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Qirong Mao, Ming Dong, Zhengwei Huang, and Yongzhao Zhan. 2014. Learning Salient Features for Speech Emotion Recognition Using Convolutional Neural Networks. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 16 (2014), 2203-2213.
  2. O. Martin, I. Kotsia, B. Macq, and I. Pitas. 2006. The eNTERFACE'05 Audio-Visual Emotion Database. In International Conference on Data Engineering Workshops.
  3. Fabien Ringeval, Björn Schuller, Michel Valstar, Shashank Jaiswal, Erik Marchi, Denis Lalanne, Roddy Cowie, and Maja Pantic. 2015. AV+EC 2015: The First Affect Recognition Challenge Bridging Across Audio, Video, and Physiological Data. In International Workshop on Audio/Visual Emotion Challenge.
  4. Christian Szegedy, Sergey Ioffe, and Vincent Vanhoucke. 2016. Inception-v4, Inception-ResNet and the Impact of Residual Connections on Learning. In Inter- national Conference on Learning Representations Workshops.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pini, S., Ahmed, O. B., Cornia, M., Baraldi, L., Cucchiara, R., & Huet, B.
Affiliations
  • University of Modena and Reggio Emilia (IT)
  • EURECOM (FR)
  • EURECOM, France
Venue
Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction
Publisher
ACM
Published
2017-11-03
Pages
536-543
OpenAlex
W2767488767
Cited by
44
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6
FWCI
6.28
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MULTIMODAL INTERACTION (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS UNIMORE (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Graduate School and Research Center in Digital Science (EURECOM) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Bpifrance
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Speech and Audio Processing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Keywords
multimodal fusion, facial expressions, 3D convolutional neural networks, 2D convolutional neural network, LSTM temporal modeling, fusion network

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