Pitch accent in context: predicting intonational prominence from text
Artificial Intelligence - Special volume on natural language processing
NPAR '00 Proceedings of the 1st international symposium on Non-photorealistic animation and rendering
Truth is beauty: researching embodied conversational agents
Embodied conversational agents
BEAT: the Behavior Expression Animation Toolkit
Proceedings of the 28th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques
Constraint-Based Facial Animation
Constraints
Real Time Responsive Animation with Personality
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
Creating Interactive Virtual Humans: Some Assembly Required
IEEE Intelligent Systems
Variations in gesturing and speech by GESTYLE
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies - Special issue: Subtle expressivity for characters and robots
Studies on gesture expressivity for a virtual agent
Speech Communication
Associating facial displays with syntactic constituents for generation
LAW '07 Proceedings of the Linguistic Annotation Workshop
User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction
Does our speech change when we cannot gesture?
Speech Communication
Hearing words helps seeing words: A cross-modal word repetition effect
Speech Communication
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In a seminal paper, Ekman (1979) remarks that brows can play an accentuation role (e.g., to signal focus). However, the literature about eyebrows is inconclusive about their exact role and as a consequence there is no agreement among developers of embodied conversational agents about their precise timing and placement. In addition, it is unclear whether eyebrow movements perform the same role in different languages. In this chapter, an analysis-by-synthesis technique is used to find out what the role of eyebrow movements is for the perception of focus and to see whether this role is the same across different languages. Three experiments are performed, both for Dutch and Italian, investigating where subjects prefer eyebrow movements, whether brows influence the perceived prominence of words and whether they are used in a functional way when subjects interpret utterances. The results for Dutch and ltalian are indeed different, but it is argued that these differences can be reduced to prosodic differences between the two languages. The advantages and potential limitations of studies via analysis-by-synthesis are discussed, and an approach to compensate for the limitations is offered.