Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31003522›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2019

A Review on Automatic Facial Expression Recognition Systems Assisted by Multimodal Sensor Data.

Najmeh Samadiani, Guangyan Huang, Borui Cai, Wei Luo, Chi-Hung Chi, Yong Xiang, Jing He

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Najmeh SamadianiSchool of Information Technology, Deakin University, Burwood VIC 3125, Australia. nsamadiani@deakin.edu.au.
Guangyan HuangSchool of Information Technology, Deakin University, Burwood VIC 3125, Australia. guangyan.huang@deakin.edu.au.
Borui CaiSchool of Information Technology, Deakin University, Burwood VIC 3125, Australia. bcai@deakin.edu.au.
Wei LuoSchool of Information Technology, Deakin University, Burwood VIC 3125, Australia. wei.luo@deakin.edu.au.
Chi-Hung ChiData61, CSIRO, Battery Point TAS 7004, Australia. chihung.chi@data61.csiro.au.
Yong XiangSchool of Information Technology, Deakin University, Burwood VIC 3125, Australia. yong.xiang@deakin.edu.au.
Jing HeSwinburne Data Science Research Institute, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn VIC 3122, Australia. jinghe@swin.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Facial Expression Recognition (FER) can be widely applied to various research areas, such as mental diseases diagnosis and human social/physiological interaction detection. With the emerging advanced technologies in hardware and sensors, FER systems have been developed to support real-world application scenes, instead of laboratory environments. Although the laboratory-controlled FER systems achieve very high accuracy, around 97%, the technical transferring from the laboratory to real-world applications faces a great barrier of very low accuracy, approximately 50%. In this survey, we comprehensively discuss three significant challenges in the unconstrained real-world environments, such as illumination variation, head pose, and subject-dependence, which may not be resolved by only analysing images/videos in the FER system. We focus on those sensors that may provide extra information and help the FER systems to detect emotion in both static images and video sequences. We introduce three categories of sensors that may help improve the accuracy and reliability of an expression recognition system by tackling the challenges mentioned above in pure image/video processing. The first group is detailed-face sensors, which detect a small dynamic change of a face component, such as eye-trackers, which may help differentiate the background noise and the feature of faces. The second is non-visual sensors, such as audio, depth, and EEG sensors, which provide extra information in addition to visual dimension and improve the recognition reliability for example in illumination variation and position shift situation. The last is target-focused sensors, such as infrared thermal sensors, which can facilitate the FER systems to filter useless visual contents and may help resist illumination variation. Also, we discuss the methods of fusing different inputs obtained from multimodal sensors in an emotion system. We comparatively review the most prominent multimodal emotional expression recognition approaches and point out their advantages and limitations. We briefly introduce the benchmark data sets related to FER systems for each category of sensors and extend our survey to the open challenges and issues. Meanwhile, we design a framework of an expression recognition system, which uses multimodal sensor data (provided by the three categories of sensors) to provide complete information about emotions to assist the pure face image/video analysis. We theoretically analyse the feasibility and achievability of our new expression recognition system, especially for the use in the wild environment, and point out the future directions to design an efficient, emotional expression recognition system.

Indexed as

Facial ExpressionEmotionsFaceFacial RecognitionHumansInterpersonal RelationsVideo Recordingemotional expression recognitionfacial expression recognition (FER)multimodal sensor datareal-world conditionsspontaneous expression

Identifiers

PMID31003522
PMCPMC6514576

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.