Affect corpus 2.0: An extension of a corpus for actor level emotion magnitude detection

MMSys'11 - Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Multimedia Systems Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 129-132

  Calix, Ricardo A ^a   Knapp, Gerald M ^a  

^a LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Affect detection; Sentient nominal entity detection; Social mining; Text to scene processing

Indexed keywords

AFFECT DETECTION; ANAPHORA RESOLUTION; AUTOMATIC ANNOTATION; CONTENT DETECTION; ENTITY DETECTION; HUMAN EMOTION; MANUAL ANNOTATION; MULTI-MODAL; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; RAPID DEVELOPMENT; SOCIAL MINING; TEXT-TO-SCENE PROCESSING;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; MULTIMEDIA SYSTEMS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

SOFTWARE AGENTS;

EID: 79952848121     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1943552.1943570     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Alm, C. O., Roth, D., Sproat, R., 2005, Emotions from text: Machine Learning for text-based emotion prediction. In proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 579-586.
2. Alm, C. O., Affect data, DOI = http://lrc.cornell.edu/swedish/dataset/ affectdata/index.html.
3. Alm, C. O., 2008, Affect in Text and Speech, PhD Dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
4. Calix, R., Mallepudi, S., Chen, B., Knapp, G., 2010, Emotion Recognition in Text for 3-D Facial Expression Rendering, IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, Special Issue on Multimodal Affective Interaction, Volume 12, Issue 6, pp. 544-551.
5. Cunningham, H., Maynard, D., Bontacheva, K., Tablan, V., 2002, GATE: A framework and graphical development Environment for robust NLP tools and applications, Proceedings of the 40th anniversary meeting of the association for computational linguistics (ACL '02), Philadelphia.
6. nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
7. Loper, E., Bird, S., 2002, NLTK: The Natural Language Toolkit, Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Effective Tools and Methodologies for Teaching Natural Language Processing and Computational Linguistics, Philadelphia, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 62-69.
8. MUC-6, 1995, Co-reference task Definition, In Proceedings of the Sixth Message understanding Conference, San Francisco, California, pp. 335-344.
9. MUC-7, 1997, Co-reference task Definition, In Proceedings of the Seventh Message Understanding Conference.
10. NIST, 2004, The ACE Evaluation Plan, NIST.
11. Pang, B., Lee, L., 2008, Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis, Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, Vol. 2, No.1-2, pp.1-135.
12. Versley, Y., Ponzetto, S. P., Poesio, M., Eidelman, V., Jern, A., Smith, J., Yang, X., Moschitti, A., 2008, BART: A Modular Toolkit for Co-reference Resolution, Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC).
13. Artstein, R., Poesio, M., 2008, Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics, Computational Linguistics, Volume 34, Issue 4, pp. 555-596.
14. Wiebe, J., Wilson, T., Cardie, C., 2005, Annotating Expressions of Opinions and Emotions in Language, Language Resources and Evaluation, Volume 39, Issue 2-3, pp. 165-210. (Pubitemid 43320361)
15. Nuance Dragon, [Date: Sept, 2010], DOI = http://nuance.com/dragon.
16. LSU-NLP, [Date: Sept, 2010], DOI = http://nlp.lsu.edu.
17. Librivox, [Date: Sept, 2010], DOI = http://librivox.org/.
18. st ed., O'Reilly Media.