- From: Catherine Pelachaud <pelachaud@iut.univ-paris8.fr>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 01:30:58 +0200
- 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! Best, Catherine 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