2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.inffus.2020.09.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What makes the difference? An empirical comparison of fusion strategies for multimodal language analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For this reason, we juxtapose the authors' results in order to acquire a sense of the actual differences between each architecture's ideas. For an empirical comparison of such architectures, which trains from scratch a wide range of the presented architectures, we refer to [88].…”
Section: Aggregated Reported Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this reason, we juxtapose the authors' results in order to acquire a sense of the actual differences between each architecture's ideas. For an empirical comparison of such architectures, which trains from scratch a wide range of the presented architectures, we refer to [88].…”
Section: Aggregated Reported Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For each model we reference both the original work and the one that evaluated the method on the MOSEI or IEMOCAP datasets. For detailed explanation and comparison of the aforementioned architectures, we refer the reader to detailed reviews on Multimodal Sentiment Analysis [21] and Multimodal Emotion Recognition [22].…”
Section: Results On Downstream Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [21] the authors retrained 11 of the most powerful and widely used models for Multimodal Language Analysis and list the number of parameters for some of them. However, this study, due to different pretraining, reports smaller amount of parameters for some models (eg.…”
Section: Model Complexitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…23,24 Information may come from a single source, such as textual data or multiple sources, such as multimodal data. 25 They may be aggregated with simple means, such as the average, which is highly sensitive to outliers, or by more complex means, such as centroids, 26 interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy numbers to include the correlation of a product's features, 21 or OWA operators, such as Induced Ordered Weighted Averaging (IOWA). 27 This paper presents a solution based on the distance defined in the lattice of hesitant linguistic terms.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…23 Information fusion is not limited to ranking products, it can be applied to product recommendations, market analysis, product defect identification, 20 sentiment classification, 27 and video analysis. 25 Finally, multiple methods can be combined when an individual method may not be accurate enough. Specifically, this is used to improve the accuracy of lexicon-based methods for sentiment analysis by using cross-ratio uninorms.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%