Affect Detection and Classification from the Non-stationary Physiological Data

Affect detection from physiological signals has received a great deal of attention recently. One arising challenge is that physiological measures are expected to exhibit considerable variations or non-stationarities over multiple days/sessions recordings. These variations pose challenges to effectively classify affective sates from future physiological data. The present study collects affective physiological data (electrocardiogram (ECG), electromyogram (EMG), skin conductivity (SC), and respiration (RSP)) from four participants over five sessions each. The study provides insights on how diagnostic physiological features of affect change over time. We compare the classification performance of two feature sets, pooled features (obtained from pooled day data) and day-specific features using an up datable classifier ensemble algorithm. The study also provides an analysis on the performance of individual physiological channels for affect detection. Our results show that using pooled feature set for affect detection is more accurate than using day-specific features. The corrugator and zygomatic facial EMGs were more reliable measures for detecting valence than arousal compared to ECG, RSP and SC over the span of multi-session recordings. It is also found that corrugator EMG features and a fusion of features from all physiological channels have the highest affect detection accuracy for both valence and arousal.

[1]  G. A. Mendelsohn,et al.  Affect grid : A single-item scale of pleasure and arousal , 1989 .

[2]  Philippe Georges Zimmermann,et al.  Valence lasts longer than arousal : persistence of induced moods as assessed by psychophysiological measures , 2009 .

[3]  Ludmila I. Kuncheva,et al.  Classifier Ensembles for Changing Environments , 2004, Multiple Classifier Systems.

[4]  Thomas Jürgensohn,et al.  Comparing Two Emotion Models for Deriving Affective States from Physiological Data , 2008, Affect and Emotion in Human-Computer Interaction.

[5]  Sylvia D. Kreibig,et al.  Autonomic nervous system activity in emotion: A review , 2010, Biological Psychology.

[6]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Statistical Pattern Recognition: A Review , 2000, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[7]  Jennifer Healey,et al.  Toward Machine Emotional Intelligence: Analysis of Affective Physiological State , 2001, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[8]  T. Subba Rao,et al.  Classification, Parameter Estimation and State Estimation: An Engineering Approach Using MATLAB , 2004 .

[9]  M. Bradley,et al.  The International Affective Picture System (IAPS) in the study of emotion and attention. , 2007 .

[10]  J. Russell A circumplex model of affect. , 1980 .

[11]  P. Ekman An argument for basic emotions , 1992 .

[12]  Elisabeth André,et al.  Emotion recognition based on physiological changes in music listening , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[13]  Rafael A. Calvo,et al.  Affective Modeling from Multichannel Physiology: Analysis of Day Differences , 2011, ACII.

[14]  Jason Williams,et al.  Emotion Recognition Using Bio-sensors: First Steps towards an Automatic System , 2004, ADS.

[15]  R. Levenson Autonomic Nervous System Differences among Emotions , 1992 .

[16]  Alfons O. Hamm,et al.  Motivational organization of emotions: Autonomic changes, cortical responses, and reflex modulation. , 2003 .

[17]  L. Maier-Hein,et al.  Session independent non-audible speech recognition using surface electromyography , 2005, IEEE Workshop on Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding, 2005..

[18]  Rafael A. Calvo,et al.  Detecting Naturalistic Expressions of Nonbasic Affect Using Physiological Signals , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing.

[19]  Roman Garnett,et al.  Sequential non-stationary dynamic classification with sparse feedback , 2010, Pattern Recognit..