Emotion Recognition Using Physiological Signals: Laboratory vs. Wearable Sensors
- 1.4k Downloads
Emotion recognition is an important research topic. Physiological signals seem to be an appropriate way for emotion recognition and specific sensors are required to collect these data. Therefore, laboratory sensors are commonly used while the number of wearable devices including similar physiological sensors is growing up. Many studies have been completed to evaluate the signal quality obtained by these sensors but without focusing on their emotion recognition capabilities. In the current study, Machine Learning models were trained to compare the Biopac MP150 (laboratory sensor) and Empatica E4 (wearable sensor) in terms of emotion recognition accuracy. Results show similar accuracy between data collected using laboratory and wearable sensors. These results support the reliability of emotion recognition outside laboratory.
KeywordsWearable sensors Laboratory sensors Emotion recognition Machine learning Physiological signals
We would like to thank all those who participated in any way in this research. This work was supported by the French government through the ANR Investment referenced ANR-10-AIRT-07.
- 1.Petta, P., Pelachaud, C., Roddy, C. (eds.): Emotion-Oriented Systems: The Humaine Handbook. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
- 5.Jerritta, S., Murugappan, M., Nagarajan, R., Wan, K.: Physiological signals based human emotion recognition: a review. Presented at the IEEE 7th International Colloquium on Signal Processing and its Applications (CSPA), March 2011Google Scholar
- 6.McCarthy, C., Pradhan, N., Redpath, C., Adler, A.: Validation of the Empatica E4 wristband. Presented at the IEEE EMBS International Student Conference (ISC), May 2016Google Scholar
- 7.Garbarino, M., Lai, M., Tognetti, S., Picard, R., Bender, D.: Empatica E3 - a wearable wireless multi-sensor device for real-time computerized biofeedback and data acquisition. Presented at the EAI 4th International Conference on Wireless Mobile Communication and Healthcare (Mobihealth) (2014)Google Scholar
- 8.Ollander, S., Godin, C., Campagne, A., Charbonnier, S.: A comparison of wearable and stationary sensors for stress detection. Presented at the October 2016Google Scholar
- 9.Lang, P.J., Bradley, M.M., Cuthbert, B.N.: International affective picture system (IAPS): technical manual and affective ratings. The Center for Research in Psychophysiology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL (1999)Google Scholar
- 10.Beck, A.T., Steer, R.A., Brown, G.K.: Beck Depression Inventory-II. Psychological Corporation, San Antonio (1996)Google Scholar
- 14.Kotsiantis, S.B.: Supervised machine learning: a review of classification techniques. In: Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Emerging Artificial Intelligence Applications in Computer Engineering: Real Word AI Systems with Applications in eHealth, HCI, Information Retrieval and Pervasive Technologies, pp. 3–24. IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2007)Google Scholar
- 16.Janssen, J.H., van den Broek, E.L.: Guidelines for mobile emotion measurement. In: Geven, A., Tscheligi, M., and Noldus, L. (eds.) ACM MobileHCI Workshop? Measuring Mobile Emotions: Measuring the Impossible?, pp. 17–20. Center for Usability Research & Engineering (CURE), Vienna, Austria (2009)Google Scholar