ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Graph-Tabular Latent Fusion for Non-Contact Body Temperature Prediction from Thermal Facial Landmarks.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Non-contact body-temperature prediction from facial thermography is affected by pose, occlusion, missing measurements, and inter-subject variation. This study proposes a graph-tabular latent-representation fusion framework for predicting body temperature from thermal facial landmark profiles. A Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC)-guided landmark graph models landmark-to-landmark thermal dependencies. At the same time, the same landmark-temperature signal is retained as a tabular representation to preserve global temperature-pattern interactions. The graph and tabular branches are encoded independently, fused at the latent level, and trained for target-landmark temperature regression with auxiliary reconstruction losses. Experiments were conducted on TFD68 under complete, missing completely at random (MCAR), and structured missing not at random (MNAR) conditions. The structured MNAR simulation combines 3D head-pose visibility modelling, accessory-driven occlusion, validation against real TFD68 occlusion annotations, and graph-construction sensitivity analyses. Results show that selected fused configurations improve over strong stand-alone graph and tabular baselines, particularly under MNAR-imputed evaluation, with the best selected configuration reducing prediction error by approximately 6%. Statistical testing further confirms significant improvements in most MNAR fused-baseline comparisons. Accuracy-efficiency analysis shows that fusion improves robustness at the cost of additional inference time, providing a flexible design space for thermal landmark-based body-temperature prediction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.