W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-emotion@w3.org > May 2008

Re: A paper on progress from EMOXG at Emotion&Computing workshop

From: Catherine Pelachaud <pelachaud@iut.univ-paris8.fr>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 01:30:58 +0200
Message-ID: <483DEB32.9070606@iut.univ-paris8.fr>
To: Dylan Evans <evansd66@googlemail.com>
CC: ian@emotionai.com, Marc Schroeder <schroed@dfki.de>, Bill Jarrold <jarrold@ai.sri.com>, Catherine Pelachaud <catherine.pelachaud@inria.fr>, "Burkhardt, Felix" <Felix.Burkhardt@t-systems.com>, Enrico Zovato <enrico.zovato@loquendo.com>, Kostas Karpouzis <kkarpou@softlab.ece.ntua.gr>, Nestor Garay <nestor.garay@ehu.es>, Idoia Zearreta <icearreta001@ikasle.ehu.es>, Christian Peter <Christian.Peter@igd-r.fraunhofer.de>, public-xg-emotion@w3.org

Hi Dylan,

The problem of including facial expression into the language is the 
exponentiality of things to include: vocal description, emotional 
gesture, body quality... The quantity of information to characterize 
bodily expressions of emotions can be very vast. Including them will 
explode the language!


Dylan Evans a écrit :
> Hi Catherine,
> The precise details of how to encode, say, a smile or a frown could be
> left to a standard like MPEG-4 or FACS.  But this would only handle
> human-like facial expressions.  It wouldn't handle robot-specific
> expressions such as moving ears, flashing lights, etc.  So we could
> have some high-level feature in which people could specify the kind of
> expression associated with a given emotion (eg. smile/flash blue
> lights).  If this was a humanlike facial expression, the details could
> then be handled by MPEG-4 or FACS (which would take "smile" as input
> and transform that into specific facial action units etc.).  That's
> assuming we are interested in the generation of facial expressions in
> artificial agents.  But we might want to include a facial expression
> feature in EML so that people or computers who are tagging video data
> can say what made them infer a particular emotion category without
> having to go into the details of FACS.
> I'm just thinking out loud, but it only struck me today that it
> appears rather inconsistent to include a category for behaviour
> tendency but not for facial expression.  Almost all the proposed core
> features deal with what we might call internal aspects of emotion -
> type of emotion, emotion intensity, appraisal etc.  If we wanted EML
> to handle just these internal aspects, and let other standards like
> FACS etc handle external aspects, then it is strange to include an
> external aspect like action tendency in the current requirements list.
>  On the other hand, if we include action tendency in the list, it is
> strange to exclude other external aspects such as facial expression.
> Does anyone else feel perplexed by this, or am I on the wrong track?
> Dylan
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Catherine Pelachaud
> <pelachaud@iut.univ-paris8.fr> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>> Expression does now seem odd but again it is very implementational, what
>>> did we decide on this, my memory is vague?
>> From what I can recall, it has been decided that any visual and acoustic
>> expression of emotion be specified outside of EMOXG. there exist already
>> some standards, such as MPEG-4, H-anim, or widely used annotation scheme,
>> FACS. In the ECA community there are quite a lot of work to develop a
>> 'standard' representation language for behaviors (and another one for
>> communicative functions).
>> best,
>> Catherine
>>> Best,
>>> Ian
>>> On Wed May 28 2:48 PM , "Dylan Evans" <evansd66@googlemail.com> sent:
>>> Hi,
>>> I'd be happy to contribute a short discussion of core 5: action
>>> tendencies, unless Bill or Ian wants to do this (it was either Bill or
>>> Ian who suggested that this be part of the core, I think). There are
>>> some interesting difficulties with this requirement. One of them
>>> concerns the level at which behaviour should be specified; another is
>>> the dependency of action tendencies on the effectors available to the
>>> system, which have huge variation. Another is the distinction between
>>> action tendencies and expression. For example, is the movement of
>>> wizkid's undefinedheadundefined an action tendency or an expression? See
>>> http://www.wizkid.info/en/page12.xml
>>> Come to think of it, we don't have a category for expressions at all
>>> in the core requirements. That seems really odd to me now, given that
>>> we have a category for action tendencies. Some robots express
>>> emotions by means of different coloured lights, while others do so by
>>> means of moving their ears, for example, so it would be good to enable
>>> robotic designers the means to register these possibilities in the
>>> EML.
>>> Dylan
>>> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 8:59 AM, Marc Schroeder wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> this email goes to all those who have participated in the preparation
>>>> and
>>>> discussion of the prioritised requirements document [1].
>>> undefined I think it would be nice to write a short paper on the progress
>>> we have made
>>> undefined in the EMOXG, for the workshop undefinedEmotion and
>>> Computingundefined [2] at the KI2008
>>>> conference. That is a small workshop aimed at promoting discussion, so
>>>> bringing in our "2 cents" seems worthwhile.
>>> undefined Deadline is 6 June; target length is 4-8 pages in Springer LNCS
>>> format, i.e.
>>>> not much space. Tentative title:
>>>> "What is most important for an Emotion Markup Language?"
>>>> The idea would be to report on the result of our priority discussions. A
>>>> main section could describe the mandatory requirements in some detail
>>>> and
>>>> the optional ones in less detail; a shorter discussion section could
>>>> point
>>>> out some of the issues that were raised on the mailing list (scales,
>>>> intention for state-of-the-art or beyond).
>>>> Who would be willing to help write the paper? Please also suggest which
>>>> section you could contribute to. Active participation would be a
>>>> precondition for being listed as an author, and we should try to find an
>>>> order of authorship that fairly represents the amount of participation
>>>> (in
>>>> the previous discussion and in paper writing).
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>> Marc
>>> undefined [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/emotion/XGR-requirements
>>> undefined [2] http://www.emotion-and-computing.de/
>>>> --
>>> undefined Dr. Marc Schröder, Senior Researcher at DFKI GmbH
>>> undefined Coordinator EU FP7 Project SEMAINE http://www.semaine-project.eu
>>> undefined Chair W3C Emotion ML Incubator
>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/emotion
>>> undefined Portal Editor http://emotion-research.net
>>> undefined Team Leader DFKI Speech Group http://mary.dfki.de
>>> undefined Project Leader DFG project PAVOQUE http://mary.dfki.de/pavoque
>>> undefined Homepage: http://www.dfki.de/~schroed
>>> undefined Email: schroed@dfki.de
>>>> Phone: +49-681-302-5303
>>> undefined Postal address: DFKI GmbH, Campus D3_2, Stuhlsatzenhausweg 3,
>>> D-66123
>>> undefined Saarbrücken, Germany
>>>> --
>>> undefined Official DFKI coordinates:
>>> undefined Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz GmbH
>>> undefined Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany
>>> undefined Geschaeftsfuehrung:
>>> undefined Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
>>> undefined Dr. Walter Olthoff
>>> undefined Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>>> undefined Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
>>> --
>>> --------------------------------------------
>>> Dr. Dylan Evans
>>> Senior Research Scientist
>>> Cork Constraint Computation Centre (4C)
>>> University College Cork,
>>> Cork, Ireland.
>>> Tel: +353-(0)21-4255408
>>> Fax: +353-(0)21-4255424
>>> Email: d.evans@4c.ucc.ie
>>> Web: http://4c.ucc.ie
>>> http://www.dylan.org.uk
>>> --------------------------------------------
>>> -------
>>> Sent from Orgoo.com <http://www.orgoo.com/Home?referrer=1> - Your
>>> communications cockpit!
Received on Wednesday, 28 May 2008 23:31:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:52:15 UTC