Literature DB >> 35669554

Training Affective Computer Vision Models by Crowdsourcing Soft-Target Labels.

Peter Washington1, Haik Kalantarian2, Jack Kent2, Arman Husic2, Aaron Kline2, Emilie Leblanc2, Cathy Hou3, Cezmi Mutlu4, Kaitlyn Dunlap5, Yordan Penev2, Nate Stockham6, Brianna Chrisman1, Kelley Paskov7, Jae-Yoon Jung2, Catalin Voss3, Nick Haber8, Dennis P Wall9.   

Abstract

Background/Introduction: Emotion detection classifiers traditionally predict discrete emotions. However, emotion expressions are often subjective, thus requiring a method to handle compound and ambiguous labels. We explore the feasibility of using crowdsourcing to acquire reliable soft-target labels and evaluate an emotion detection classifier trained with these labels. We hypothesize that training with labels that are representative of the diversity of human interpretation of an image will result in predictions that are similarly representative on a disjoint test set. We also hypothesize that crowdsourcing can generate distributions which mirror those generated in a lab setting.
Methods: We center our study on the Child Affective Facial Expression (CAFE) dataset, a gold standard collection of images depicting pediatric facial expressions along with 100 human labels per image. To test the feasibility of crowdsourcing to generate these labels, we used Microworkers to acquire labels for 207 CAFE images. We evaluate both unfiltered workers as well as workers selected through a short crowd filtration process. We then train two versions of a ResNet-152 neural network on soft-target CAFE labels using the original 100 annotations provided with the dataset: (1) a classifier trained with traditional one-hot encoded labels, and (2) a classifier trained with vector labels representing the distribution of CAFE annotator responses. We compare the resulting softmax output distributions of the two classifiers with a 2-sample independent t-test of L1 distances between the classifier's output probability distribution and the distribution of human labels.
Results: While agreement with CAFE is weak for unfiltered crowd workers, the filtered crowd agree with the CAFE labels 100% of the time for happy, neutral, sad and "fear + surprise", and 88.8% for "anger + disgust". While the F1-score for a one-hot encoded classifier is much higher (94.33% vs. 78.68%) with respect to the ground truth CAFE labels, the output probability vector of the crowd-trained classifier more closely resembles the distribution of human labels (t=3.2827, p=0.0014). Conclusions: For many applications of affective computing, reporting an emotion probability distribution that accounts for the subjectivity of human interpretation can be more useful than an absolute label. Crowdsourcing, including a sufficient filtering mechanism for selecting reliable crowd workers, is a feasible solution for acquiring soft-target labels.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 35669554      PMCID: PMC9165031          DOI: 10.1007/s12559-021-09936-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognit Comput        ISSN: 1866-9956            Impact factor:   4.890


  37 in total

1.  Are there basic emotions?

Authors:  P Ekman
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Feasibility of Automated Training for Facial Emotion Expression and Recognition in Autism.

Authors:  Susan W White; Lynn Abbott; Andrea Trubanova Wieckowski; Nicole N Capriola-Hall; Sherin Aly; Amira Youssef
Journal:  Behav Ther       Date:  2017-12-28

3.  Feasibility Testing of a Wearable Behavioral Aid for Social Learning in Children with Autism.

Authors:  Jena Daniels; Nick Haber; Catalin Voss; Jessey Schwartz; Serena Tamura; Azar Fazel; Aaron Kline; Peter Washington; Jennifer Phillips; Terry Winograd; Carl Feinstein; Dennis P Wall
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 2.342

4.  An android for enhancing social skills and emotion recognition in people with autism.

Authors:  Giovanni Pioggia; Roberta Igliozzi; Marcello Ferro; Arti Ahluwalia; Filippo Muratori; Danilo De Rossi
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.802

5.  Clinical Evaluation of a Novel and Mobile Autism Risk Assessment.

Authors:  Marlena Duda; Jena Daniels; Dennis P Wall
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2016-06

6.  Use of machine learning for behavioral distinction of autism and ADHD.

Authors:  M Duda; R Ma; N Haber; D P Wall
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 6.222

7.  Use of machine learning to shorten observation-based screening and diagnosis of autism.

Authors:  D P Wall; J Kosmicki; T F Deluca; E Harstad; V A Fusaro
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2012-04-10       Impact factor: 6.222

8.  Reliability of crowdsourcing as a method for collecting emotions labels on pictures.

Authors:  Olga Korovina; Marcos Baez; Fabio Casati
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2019-10-30

9.  The Performance of Emotion Classifiers for Children With Parent-Reported Autism: Quantitative Feasibility Study.

Authors:  Haik Kalantarian; Khaled Jedoui; Kaitlyn Dunlap; Jessey Schwartz; Peter Washington; Arman Husic; Qandeel Tariq; Michael Ning; Aaron Kline; Dennis Paul Wall
Journal:  JMIR Ment Health       Date:  2020-04-01

10.  Selection of trustworthy crowd workers for telemedical diagnosis of pediatric autism spectrum disorder.

Authors:  Peter Washington; Emilie Leblanc; Kaitlyn Dunlap; Yordan Penev; Maya Varma; Jae-Yoon Jung; Brianna Chrisman; Min Woo Sun; Nathaniel Stockham; Kelley Marie Paskov; Haik Kalantarian; Catalin Voss; Nick Haber; Dennis P Wall
Journal:  Pac Symp Biocomput       Date:  2021
View more
  1 in total

1.  Classifying Autism From Crowdsourced Semistructured Speech Recordings: Machine Learning Model Comparison Study.

Authors:  Nathan A Chi; Peter Washington; Aaron Kline; Arman Husic; Cathy Hou; Chloe He; Kaitlyn Dunlap; Dennis P Wall
Journal:  JMIR Pediatr Parent       Date:  2022-04-14
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.