Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41140627›Full record

ArticleMethodsX2025

Integrating commonsense knowledge with GPT embeddings for emotion classification.

Uma Yadav, Priya Dasarwar, Deepak Asudani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MethodsX, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Uma YadavSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Ramdeobaba University, Nagpur, India.
Priya DasarwarSymbiosis Institute of Technology, Nagpur Campus, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Pune, India.
Deepak AsudaniSymbiosis Institute of Technology, Nagpur Campus, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Pune, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recognizing emotions in text is still hard, especially in real life where little differences and hidden indications are widespread. Because they don't rely enough on either contextual understanding or external knowledge, traditional models typically miss the deeper layers of human emotion. This research suggests a new paradigm based on fusion that combines contextual semantics with common sense knowledge to improve emotion classification. We use GPT-based embeddings and external knowledge graphs like ConceptNet and COMET to help us grasp emotions in text both via experience and through meaning. Our technique makes important contributions by: • Includes both contextual meaning and common sense reasoning to find emotions more accurately. • It connects surface-level language clues with hidden emotional states. • It makes it easier to sort emotions into seven main groups: Joy, Sadness, Anger, Fear, Surprise, Disgust, and Neutral. A thorough examination of the GoEmotions dataset shows that our model does far better than current baselines at classifying multiple emotions. Combining commonsense and contextual aspects makes things easier to understand and more reliable, especially when dealing with indirect or unclear emotional expressions. Our results show how important it is to combine semantic knowledge with human-like experiential reasoning to make affective computing more accurate and useful in more situations.

Indexed as

Commonsense knowledgeConceptNetContextual embeddingEmotion detectionGPT-4Multilabel classification

Identifiers

PMID41140627
PMCPMC12549716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.