Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33501307›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in robotics and AI2020

Emotion Recognition for Human-Robot Interaction: Recent Advances and Future Perspectives.

Matteo Spezialetti, Giuseppe Placidi, Silvia Rossi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Preferred Distance in Human-Drone Interaction.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

3 authors.

Matteo SpezialettiPRISCA (Intelligent Robotics and Advanced Cognitive System Projects) Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Giuseppe PlacidiA2VI (Acquisition, Analysis, Visualization & Imaging Laboratory) Laboratory, Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences (MESVA), University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy.
Silvia RossiPRISCA (Intelligent Robotics and Advanced Cognitive System Projects) Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A fascinating challenge in the field of human-robot interaction is the possibility to endow robots with emotional intelligence in order to make the interaction more intuitive, genuine, and natural. To achieve this, a critical point is the capability of the robot to infer and interpret human emotions. Emotion recognition has been widely explored in the broader fields of human-machine interaction and affective computing. Here, we report recent advances in emotion recognition, with particular regard to the human-robot interaction context. Our aim is to review the state of the art of currently adopted emotional models, interaction modalities, and classification strategies and offer our point of view on future developments and critical issues. We focus on facial expressions, body poses and kinematics, voice, brain activity, and peripheral physiological responses, also providing a list of available datasets containing data from these modalities.

Indexed as

affective computingemotion recognition (ER)human-robot interactionmachine learningmultimodal data

Identifiers

PMID33501307
PMCPMC7806093

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.