Skip to main content

Table 6 Overview of emotion recognition based on multimodality

From: Development and application of emotion recognition technology — a systematic literature review

No

Author & year

Feature extraction

N

Emotions

Test sample

Pattern recognition methods

Accuracy

1

M. Shamim Hossain (2016)

Video, Audio

100

Pain, Tension, Normal

College students

GMM

99.4%

2

Amico F (2016)

1ERP, GSR, 2HRV, facial emotion and degree of pupil dilation

48

Fear, Sadness, Joy, Anger, Disgust, Surprise

Depression patients, BD patients, BPD patients

NA

NA

3

Gillian M. Sandstrom (2016)

Self-report, psychological, daily behavior

NA

Mania, Depression

BD patients

Mean, Standard deviation, Friedman test, SVM

NA

4

Xinfang Ding (2019)

EEG, eye tracking information, GSR

348

Depression

3MDD patients

Chi-square test, T test, Random forest, LR, SVM

Accuracy is 79.63%

Precision is 76.67%

5

Bai Ran (2021)

Clinician rating scale, Sself-rating scale, telephone usage data, sleep data, step data

334

Steady-remission, Steady-depressed, Swing-drastic, Swing-moderate

MDD patients

SVM, KNN, DT, Naïve bayes, RF, LR

Steady-depressed: 84.27%

Swing-drastic: 85.33%

6

Geerling B (2021)

Graphical representation of mood swings, online monitoring of sleep

17

NA

BD patients

4LCM

NA

7

Haiyun Huang (2021)

Behavior scale, EEG, pupillary response, gaze distance

18

Happiness, Anger, Sadness

Disturbance of consciousnes

Spectral turbulence measurement, SVM-RFE

91.5 ± 6.34%

8

Mano, Leandro Y (2016)

Images, physiological signals

NA

Neutrality, Happiness, Sadness, Fear, Anger, Surprise

Extended Cohn-Kanade (CK+) dataset

T test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, 5KNN, 6DT, Fuzzy logic, Bayesian network, SVM

99.75%

9

Yuying Tong (2020)

HRSD, HAMA, EEG, facial expression

50

Depression

Depression patients

Three-factor repeated measurement variance analysis

Happy: 87.68 ± 7.50%

Neutral:82.87 ± 10.14%

Sad: 75.06 ± 13.32%

10

Yulong Li (2021)

SAS, SDS, HAMD, EEG

54

Depression

Androgen alopecia patients

FAW-FS algorithm, ANOVA, Mutual information, χ2 test, LR, DT, KNN, SVM, 7RF

LR: 80.87%

DT: 79.24%

KNN: 80.42%

SVM: 83.07%

RF: 81.45%

  1. 1ERP: Event-Related Potentials; 2HRV: Heart Rate Variability; 3MDD: Major Depressive Disorder;4LCM: Life Cycle Management; 5KNN: K-Nearest Neighbors; 6DT: Decision Trees; 7RF: Random Forest