Desmond C. Ong

Jared Moore, Ashish Mehta, William Agnew et al. · stanford

As large language models (LLMs) have proliferated, disturbing anecdotal reports of negative psychological effects, such as delusions, self-harm, and ``AI psychosis,'' have emerged in global media and legal discourse. However, it remains unclear how users and chatbots interact over the course of lengthy delusional ``spirals,'' limiting our ability to understand and mitigate the harm. In our work, we analyze logs of conversations with LLM chatbots from 19 users who report having experienced psychological harms from chatbot use. Many of our participants come from a support group for such chatbot users. We also include chat logs from participants covered by media outlets in widely-distributed stories about chatbot-reinforced delusions. In contrast to prior work that speculates on potential AI harms to mental health, to our knowledge we present the first in-depth study of such high-profile and veridically harmful cases. We develop an inventory of 28 codes and apply it to the $391,562$ messages in the logs. Codes include whether a user demonstrates delusional thinking (15.5% of user messages), a user expresses suicidal thoughts (69 validated user messages), or a chatbot misrepresents itself as sentient (21.2% of chatbot messages). We analyze the co-occurrence of message codes. We find, for example, that messages that declare romantic interest and messages where the chatbot describes itself as sentient occur much more often in longer conversations, suggesting that these topics could promote or result from user over-engagement and that safeguards in these areas may degrade in multi-turn settings. We conclude with concrete recommendations for how policymakers, LLM chatbot developers, and users can use our inventory and conversation analysis tool to understand and mitigate harm from LLM chatbots. Warning: This paper discusses self-harm, trauma, and violence.

Hongli Zhan, Desmond C. Ong, Junyi Jessy Li

The emotions we experience involve complex processes; besides physiological aspects, research in psychology has studied cognitive appraisals where people assess their situations subjectively, according to their own values (Scherer, 2005). Thus, the same situation can often result in different emotional experiences. While the detection of emotion is a well-established task, there is very limited work so far on the automatic prediction of cognitive appraisals. This work fills the gap by presenting CovidET-Appraisals, the most comprehensive dataset to-date that assesses 24 appraisal dimensions, each with a natural language rationale, across 241 Reddit posts. CovidET-Appraisals presents an ideal testbed to evaluate the ability of large language models -- excelling at a wide range of NLP tasks -- to automatically assess and explain cognitive appraisals. We found that while the best models are performant, open-sourced LLMs fall short at this task, presenting a new challenge in the future development of emotionally intelligent models. We release our dataset at https://github.com/honglizhan/CovidET-Appraisals-Public.

Kanishk Gandhi, Zoe Lynch, Jan-Philipp Fränken et al.

Understanding emotions is fundamental to human interaction and experience. Humans easily infer emotions from situations or facial expressions, situations from emotions, and do a variety of other affective cognition. How adept is modern AI at these inferences? We introduce an evaluation framework for testing affective cognition in foundation models. Starting from psychological theory, we generate 1,280 diverse scenarios exploring relationships between appraisals, emotions, expressions, and outcomes. We evaluate the abilities of foundation models (GPT-4, Claude-3, Gemini-1.5-Pro) and humans (N = 567) across carefully selected conditions. Our results show foundation models tend to agree with human intuitions, matching or exceeding interparticipant agreement. In some conditions, models are ``superhuman'' -- they better predict modal human judgements than the average human. All models benefit from chain-of-thought reasoning. This suggests foundation models have acquired a human-like understanding of emotions and their influence on beliefs and behavior.

Ashish Mehta, Jared Moore, Jacy Reese Anthis et al.

There is growing concern that AI chatbots might fuel delusional beliefs in users. Some have suggested that humans and chatbots mutually reinforce false beliefs over time, but quantitative evidence is lacking. Using a unique dataset of chat logs from individuals who exhibited delusional thinking, we developed a latent state model that captures accumulating and decaying influences between humans and chatbots. We find that a bidirectional influence model substantially outperforms a unidirectional alternative where humans are the primary driver of delusion. We find that humans exert strong but short-lived influence on chatbots, whereas chatbots exert longer-lasting influence on humans. Moreover, chatbots exert strong, stable self-influence over their own future outputs that tends to perpetuate delusions over long stretches of conversation. In fact, this chatbot self-influence constituted the dominant pathway when considering accumulated influence over time. Overall, these results indicate that humans tend to drive sharp, immediate increases in delusion, whereas chatbots sustain and propagate these effects over longer timescales. Together, these findings provide the first quantitative evidence that human-chatbot interactions can form feedback loops of delusion, decomposable into distinct pathways with dissociable temporal dynamics. By doing so, they can inform the development of safer AI systems.

Laya Iyer, Kriti Aggarwal, Sanmi Koyejo et al.

Supportive conversation depends on skills that go beyond language fluency, including reading emotions, adjusting tone, and navigating moments of resistance, frustration, or distress. Despite rapid progress in language models, we still lack a clear way to understand how their abilities in these interpersonal domains compare to those of humans. We introduce HEART, the first-ever framework that directly compares humans and LLMs on the same multi-turn emotional-support conversations. For each dialogue history, we pair human and model responses and evaluate them through blinded human raters and an ensemble of LLM-as-judge evaluators. All assessments follow a rubric grounded in interpersonal communication science across five dimensions: Human Alignment, Empathic Responsiveness, Attunement, Resonance, and Task-Following. HEART uncovers striking behavioral patterns. Several frontier models approach or surpass the average human responses in perceived empathy and consistency. At the same time, humans maintain advantages in adaptive reframing, tension-naming, and nuanced tone shifts, particularly in adversarial turns. Human and LLM-as-judge preferences align on about 80 percent of pairwise comparisons, matching inter-human agreement, and their written rationales emphasize similar HEART dimensions. This pattern suggests an emerging convergence in the criteria used to assess supportive quality. By placing humans and models on equal footing, HEART reframes supportive dialogue as a distinct capability axis, separable from general reasoning or linguistic fluency. It provides a unified empirical foundation for understanding where model-generated support aligns with human social judgment, where it diverges, and how affective conversational competence scales with model size.

Varsha Suresh, Desmond C. Ong

Machine learning models automatically learn discriminative features from the data, and are therefore susceptible to learn strongly-correlated biases, such as using protected attributes like gender and race. Most existing bias mitigation approaches aim to explicitly reduce the model's focus on these protected features. In this work, we propose to mitigate bias by explicitly guiding the model's focus towards task-relevant features using domain knowledge, and we hypothesize that this can indirectly reduce the dependence of the model on spurious correlations it learns from the data. We explore bias mitigation in facial expression recognition systems using facial Action Units (AUs) as the task-relevant feature. To this end, we introduce Feature-based Positive Matching Contrastive Loss which learns the distances between the positives of a sample based on the similarity between their corresponding AU embeddings. We compare our approach with representative baselines and show that incorporating task-relevant features via our method can improve model fairness at minimal cost to classification performance.

Hongli Zhan, Emma S. Gueorguieva, Javier Hernandez et al.

Large language models (LLMs) produce responses rated as highly empathic in single-turn settings (Ayers et al., 2023; Lee et al., 2024), yet they are also known to be formulaic generators that reuse the same lexical patterns, syntactic templates, and discourse structures across tasks (Jiang et al., 2025; Shaib et al., 2024; Namuduri et al., 2025). Less attention has been paid to whether this formulaicity extends to the level of discourse moves, i.e., what a response does for the person it is addressing. This question is especially consequential for empathic dialogue, where effective support demands not just a kind response at one moment but varied strategies as a conversation unfolds (Stiles et al., 1998). Indeed, prior work shows that LLMs reuse the same tactic sequences more than human supporters in single-turn settings (Gueorguieva et al., 2026). We extend this analysis to multi-turn conversations and find that the rigidity compounds: once a tactic appears in a supporter turn, LLMs reuse it in the next at nearly double the rate of humans (0.50-0.56 vs. 0.27). This pattern holds across LLMs serving as supporters in real emotional support conversations, and is invisible to standard similarity metrics. To address this gap, we introduce MINT (Multi-turn Inter-tactic Novelty Training), the first reinforcement learning framework to optimize discourse move diversity across multi-turn empathic dialogue. The best MINT variant combines an empathy quality reward with a cross-turn tactic novelty signal, improving aggregate empathy by 25.3% over vanilla across 1.7B and 4B models while reducing cross-turn discourse move repetition by 26.3% on the 4B model, surpassing all baselines including quality-only and token-level diversity methods on both measures. These results suggest that what current models lack is not empathy itself, but the ability to vary their discourse moves across a conversation.

Desmond C. Ong

Large Language Models have taken the cognitive science world by storm. It is perhaps timely now to take stock of the various research paradigms that have been used to make scientific inferences about ``cognition" in these models or about human cognition. We review several emerging research paradigms -- GPT-ology, LLMs-as-computational-models, and ``silicon sampling" -- and review recent papers that have used LLMs under these paradigms. In doing so, we discuss their claims as well as challenges to scientific inference under these various paradigms. We highlight several outstanding issues about LLMs that have to be addressed to push our science forward: closed-source vs open-sourced models; (the lack of visibility of) training data; and reproducibility in LLM research, including forming conventions on new task ``hyperparameters" like instructions and prompts.

Yoon Kyung Lee, Jina Suh, Hongli Zhan et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated surprising performance on many tasks, including writing supportive messages that display empathy. Here, we had these models generate empathic messages in response to posts describing common life experiences, such as workplace situations, parenting, relationships, and other anxiety- and anger-eliciting situations. Across two studies (N=192, 202), we showed human raters a variety of responses written by several models (GPT4 Turbo, Llama2, and Mistral), and had people rate these responses on how empathic they seemed to be. We found that LLM-generated responses were consistently rated as more empathic than human-written responses. Linguistic analyses also show that these models write in distinct, predictable ``styles", in terms of their use of punctuation, emojis, and certain words. These results highlight the potential of using LLMs to enhance human peer support in contexts where empathy is important.

Jared Moore, Declan Grabb, William Agnew et al.

Should a large language model (LLM) be used as a therapist? In this paper, we investigate the use of LLMs to *replace* mental health providers, a use case promoted in the tech startup and research space. We conduct a mapping review of therapy guides used by major medical institutions to identify crucial aspects of therapeutic relationships, such as the importance of a therapeutic alliance between therapist and client. We then assess the ability of LLMs to reproduce and adhere to these aspects of therapeutic relationships by conducting several experiments investigating the responses of current LLMs, such as `gpt-4o`. Contrary to best practices in the medical community, LLMs 1) express stigma toward those with mental health conditions and 2) respond inappropriately to certain common (and critical) conditions in naturalistic therapy settings -- e.g., LLMs encourage clients' delusional thinking, likely due to their sycophancy. This occurs even with larger and newer LLMs, indicating that current safety practices may not address these gaps. Furthermore, we note foundational and practical barriers to the adoption of LLMs as therapists, such as that a therapeutic alliance requires human characteristics (e.g., identity and stakes). For these reasons, we conclude that LLMs should not replace therapists, and we discuss alternative roles for LLMs in clinical therapy.

Hongli Zhan, Allen Zheng, Yoon Kyung Lee et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have offered new opportunities for emotional support, and recent work has shown that they can produce empathic responses to people in distress. However, long-term mental well-being requires emotional self-regulation, where a one-time empathic response falls short. This work takes a first step by engaging with cognitive reappraisals, a strategy from psychology practitioners that uses language to targetedly change negative appraisals that an individual makes of the situation; such appraisals is known to sit at the root of human emotional experience. We hypothesize that psychologically grounded principles could enable such advanced psychology capabilities in LLMs, and design RESORT which consists of a series of reappraisal constitutions across multiple dimensions that can be used as LLM instructions. We conduct a first-of-its-kind expert evaluation (by clinical psychologists with M.S. or Ph.D. degrees) of an LLM's zero-shot ability to generate cognitive reappraisal responses to medium-length social media messages asking for support. This fine-grained evaluation showed that even LLMs at the 7B scale guided by RESORT are capable of generating empathic responses that can help users reappraise their situations.

Emma Gueorguieva, Hongli Zhan, Jina Suh et al.

Recent research shows that greater numbers of people are turning to Large Language Models (LLMs) for emotional support, and that people rate LLM responses as more empathic than human-written responses. We suggest a reason for this success: LLMs have learned and consistently deploy a well-liked template for expressing empathy. We develop a taxonomy of 10 empathic language "tactics" that include validating someone's feelings and paraphrasing, and apply this taxonomy to characterize the language that people and LLMs produce when writing empathic responses. Across a set of 2 studies comparing a total of n = 3,265 AI-generated (by six models) and n = 1,290 human-written responses, we find that LLM responses are highly formulaic at a discourse functional level. We discovered a template -- a structured sequence of tactics -- that matches between 83--90% of LLM responses (and 60--83\% in a held out sample), and when those are matched, covers 81--92% of the response. By contrast, human-written responses are more diverse. We end with a discussion of implications for the future of AI-generated empathy.

Yuxiang Zhou, Hainiu Xu, Desmond C. Ong et al.

As the utilization of language models in interdisciplinary, human-centered studies grow, expectations of their capabilities continue to evolve. Beyond excelling at conventional tasks, models are now expected to perform well on user-centric measurements involving confidence and human (dis)agreement-factors that reflect subjective preferences. While modeling subjectivity plays an essential role in cognitive science and has been extensively studied, its investigation at the intersection with NLP remains under-explored. In light of this gap, we explore how language models can quantify subjectivity in cognitive appraisal by conducting comprehensive experiments and analyses with both fine-tuned models and prompt-based large language models (LLMs). Our quantitative and qualitative results demonstrate that personality traits and demographic information are critical for measuring subjectivity, yet existing post-hoc calibration methods often fail to achieve satisfactory performance. Furthermore, our in-depth analysis provides valuable insights to guide future research at the intersection of NLP and cognitive science.

Jina Suh, Lindy Le, Erfan Shayegani et al.

Empathy is increasingly recognized as a key factor in human-AI communication, yet conventional approaches to "digital empathy" often focus on simulating internal, human-like emotional states while overlooking the inherently subjective, contextual, and relational facets of empathy as perceived by users. In this work, we propose a human-centered taxonomy that emphasizes observable empathic behaviors and introduce a new dataset, Sense-7, of real-world conversations between information workers and Large Language Models (LLMs), which includes per-turn empathy annotations directly from the users, along with user characteristics, and contextual details, offering a more user-grounded representation of empathy. Analysis of 695 conversations from 109 participants reveals that empathy judgments are highly individualized, context-sensitive, and vulnerable to disruption when conversational continuity fails or user expectations go unmet. To promote further research, we provide a subset of 672 anonymized conversation and provide exploratory classification analysis, showing that an LLM-based classifier can recognize 5 levels of empathy with an encouraging average Spearman $ρ$=0.369 and Accuracy=0.487 over this set. Overall, our findings underscore the need for AI designs that dynamically tailor empathic behaviors to user contexts and goals, offering a roadmap for future research and practical development of socially attuned, human-centered artificial agents.

W. Bradley Knox, Katie Bradford, Samanta Varela Castro et al.

Amid the growing prevalence of human -- AI interaction, large language models and other AI-based entities increasingly provide forms of companionship to human users. Such AI companionship -- i.e., bonded relationships between humans and AI systems that resemble the relationships people have with family members, friends, and romantic partners -- might substantially benefit humans. Yet such relationships can also do profound harm. We propose a framework for analyzing potential negative impacts of AI companionship by identifying specific harmful traits of AI companions and speculatively mapping causal pathways back from these traits to possible causes and forward to potential harmful effects. We provide detailed, structured analysis of four potentially harmful traits -- the absence of natural endpoints for relationships, vulnerability to product sunsetting, high attachment anxiety, and propensity to engender protectiveness -- and briefly discuss fourteen others. For each trait, we propose hypotheses connecting causes -- such as misaligned optimization objectives and the digital nature of AI companions -- to fundamental harms -- including reduced autonomy, diminished quality of human relationships, and deception. Each hypothesized causal connection identifies a target for potential empirical evaluation. Our analysis examines harms at three levels: to human partners directly, to their relationships with other humans, and to society broadly. We examine how existing law struggles to address these emerging harms, discuss potential benefits of AI companions, and conclude with design recommendations for mitigating risks. This analysis offers immediate suggestions for reducing risks while laying a foundation for deeper investigation of this critical but understudied topic.

Zhengxuan Wu, Elisa Kreiss, Desmond C. Ong et al.

The ability to compositionally map language to referents, relations, and actions is an essential component of language understanding. The recent gSCAN dataset (Ruis et al. 2020, NeurIPS) is an inspiring attempt to assess the capacity of models to learn this kind of grounding in scenarios involving navigational instructions. However, we show that gSCAN's highly constrained design means that it does not require compositional interpretation and that many details of its instructions and scenarios are not required for task success. To address these limitations, we propose ReaSCAN, a benchmark dataset that builds off gSCAN but requires compositional language interpretation and reasoning about entities and relations. We assess two models on ReaSCAN: a multi-modal baseline and a state-of-the-art graph convolutional neural model. These experiments show that ReaSCAN is substantially harder than gSCAN for both neural architectures. This suggests that ReaSCAN can serve as a valuable benchmark for advancing our understanding of models' compositional generalization and reasoning capabilities.

Varsha Suresh, Desmond C. Ong

Fine-grained classification involves dealing with datasets with larger number of classes with subtle differences between them. Guiding the model to focus on differentiating dimensions between these commonly confusable classes is key to improving performance on fine-grained tasks. In this work, we analyse the contrastive fine-tuning of pre-trained language models on two fine-grained text classification tasks, emotion classification and sentiment analysis. We adaptively embed class relationships into a contrastive objective function to help differently weigh the positives and negatives, and in particular, weighting closely confusable negatives more than less similar negative examples. We find that Label-aware Contrastive Loss outperforms previous contrastive methods, in the presence of larger number and/or more confusable classes, and helps models to produce output distributions that are more differentiated.

Varsha Suresh, Desmond C. Ong

Modern emotion recognition systems are trained to recognize only a small set of emotions, and hence fail to capture the broad spectrum of emotions people experience and express in daily life. In order to engage in more empathetic interactions, future AI has to perform \textit{fine-grained} emotion recognition, distinguishing between many more varied emotions. Here, we focus on improving fine-grained emotion recognition by introducing external knowledge into a pre-trained self-attention model. We propose Knowledge-Embedded Attention (KEA) to use knowledge from emotion lexicons to augment the contextual representations from pre-trained ELECTRA and BERT models. Our results and error analyses outperform previous models on several datasets, and is better able to differentiate closely-confusable emotions, such as afraid and terrified.

Desmond C. Ong

The recent rapid advancements in artificial intelligence research and deployment have sparked more discussion about the potential ramifications of socially- and emotionally-intelligent AI. The question is not if research can produce such affectively-aware AI, but when it will. What will it mean for society when machines -- and the corporations and governments they serve -- can "read" people's minds and emotions? What should developers and operators of such AI do, and what should they not do? The goal of this article is to pre-empt some of the potential implications of these developments, and propose a set of guidelines for evaluating the (moral and) ethical consequences of affectively-aware AI, in order to guide researchers, industry professionals, and policy-makers. We propose a multi-stakeholder analysis framework that separates the ethical responsibilities of AI Developers vis-à-vis the entities that deploy such AI -- which we term Operators. Our analysis produces two pillars that clarify the responsibilities of each of these stakeholders: Provable Beneficence, which rests on proving the effectiveness of the AI, and Responsible Stewardship, which governs responsible collection, use, and storage of data and the decisions made from such data. We end with recommendations for researchers, developers, operators, as well as regulators and law-makers.

Varsha Suresh, Gerard Yeo, Desmond C. Ong

Facial Expression Recognition is a commercially-important application, but one under-appreciated limitation is that such applications require making predictions on out-of-sample distributions, where target images have different properties from the images the model was trained on. How well -- or how badly -- do facial expression recognition models do on unseen target domains? We provide a systematic and critical evaluation of transfer learning -- specifically, domain generalization -- in facial expression recognition. Using a state-of-the-art model with twelve datasets (six collected in-lab and six ``in-the-wild"), we conduct extensive round-robin-style experiments to evaluate classification accuracies when given new data from an unseen dataset. We also perform multi-source experiments to examine a model's ability to generalize from multiple source datasets, including (i) within-setting (e.g., lab to lab), (ii) cross-setting (e.g., in-the-wild to lab), and (iii) leave-one-out settings. Finally, we compare our results with three commercially-available software. We find sobering results: the accuracy of single- and multi-source domain generalization is only modest. Even for the best-performing multi-source settings, we observe average classification accuracies of 65.6% (range: 34.6%-88.6%; chance: 14.3%), corresponding to an average drop of 10.8 percentage points from the within-corpus classification performance (mean: 76.4%). We discuss the need for regular, systematic investigations into the generalizability of affective computing models and applications.

Zhengxuan Wu, Desmond C. Ong

BERT, as one of the pretrianed language models, attracts the most attention in recent years for creating new benchmarks across GLUE tasks via fine-tuning. One pressing issue is to open up the blackbox and explain the decision makings of BERT. A number of attribution techniques have been proposed to explain BERT models, but are often limited to sequence to sequence tasks. In this paper, we adapt existing attribution methods on explaining decision makings of BERT in sequence classification tasks. We conduct extensive analyses of four existing attribution methods by applying them to four different datasets in sentiment analysis. We compare the reliability and robustness of each method via various ablation studies. Furthermore, we test whether attribution methods explain generalized semantics across semantically similar tasks. Our work provides solid guidance for using attribution methods to explain decision makings of BERT for downstream classification tasks.

Zhengxuan Wu, Desmond C. Ong

Aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) and Targeted ASBA (TABSA) allow finer-grained inferences about sentiment to be drawn from the same text, depending on context. For example, a given text can have different targets (e.g., neighborhoods) and different aspects (e.g., price or safety), with different sentiment associated with each target-aspect pair. In this paper, we investigate whether adding context to self-attention models improves performance on (T)ABSA. We propose two variants of Context-Guided BERT (CG-BERT) that learn to distribute attention under different contexts. We first adapt a context-aware Transformer to produce a CG-BERT that uses context-guided softmax-attention. Next, we propose an improved Quasi-Attention CG-BERT model that learns a compositional attention that supports subtractive attention. We train both models with pretrained BERT on two (T)ABSA datasets: SentiHood and SemEval-2014 (Task 4). Both models achieve new state-of-the-art results with our QACG-BERT model having the best performance. Furthermore, we provide analyses of the impact of context in the our proposed models. Our work provides more evidence for the utility of adding context-dependencies to pretrained self-attention-based language models for context-based natural language tasks.

Zhengxuan Wu, Thanh-Son Nguyen, Desmond C. Ong

Neural attention, especially the self-attention made popular by the Transformer, has become the workhorse of state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) models. Very recent work suggests that the self-attention in the Transformer encodes syntactic information; Here, we show that self-attention scores encode semantics by considering sentiment analysis tasks. In contrast to gradient-based feature attribution methods, we propose a simple and effective Layer-wise Attention Tracing (LAT) method to analyze structured attention weights. We apply our method to Transformer models trained on two tasks that have surface dissimilarities, but share common semantics---sentiment analysis of movie reviews and time-series valence prediction in life story narratives. Across both tasks, words with high aggregated attention weights were rich in emotional semantics, as quantitatively validated by an emotion lexicon labeled by human annotators. Our results show that structured attention weights encode rich semantics in sentiment analysis, and match human interpretations of semantics.

Zhengxuan Wu, Desmond C. Ong

Grounding language in contextual information is crucial for fine-grained natural language understanding. One important task that involves grounding contextual modifiers is color generation. Given a reference color "green", and a modifier "bluey", how does one generate a color that could represent "bluey green"? We propose a computational pragmatics model that formulates this color generation task as a recursive game between speakers and listeners. In our model, a pragmatic speaker reasons about the inferences that a listener would make, and thus generates a modified color that is maximally informative to help the listener recover the original referents. In this paper, we show that incorporating pragmatic information provides significant improvements in performance compared with other state-of-the-art deep learning models where pragmatic inference and flexibility in representing colors from a large continuous space are lacking. Our model has an absolute 98% increase in performance for the test cases where the reference colors are unseen during training, and an absolute 40% increase in performance for the test cases where both the reference colors and the modifiers are unseen during training.

Terence X. Lim, Sidney Tio, Desmond C. Ong

Recent advances in Artificial Intelligence have produced agents that can beat human world champions at games like Go, Starcraft, and Dota2. However, most of these models do not seem to play in a human-like manner: People infer others' intentions from their behaviour, and use these inferences in scheming and strategizing. Here, using a Bayesian Theory of Mind (ToM) approach, we investigated how much an explicit representation of others' intentions improves performance in a cooperative game. We compared the performance of humans playing with optimal-planning agents with and without ToM, in a cooperative game where players have to flexibly cooperate to achieve joint goals. We find that teams with ToM agents significantly outperform non-ToM agents when collaborating with all types of partners: non-ToM, ToM, as well as human players, and that the benefit of ToM increases the more ToM agents there are. These findings have implications for designing better cooperative agents.

Desmond C. Ong, Zhengxuan Wu, Tan Zhi-Xuan et al.

Human emotions unfold over time, and more affective computing research has to prioritize capturing this crucial component of real-world affect. Modeling dynamic emotional stimuli requires solving the twin challenges of time-series modeling and of collecting high-quality time-series datasets. We begin by assessing the state-of-the-art in time-series emotion recognition, and we review contemporary time-series approaches in affective computing, including discriminative and generative models. We then introduce the first version of the Stanford Emotional Narratives Dataset (SENDv1): a set of rich, multimodal videos of self-paced, unscripted emotional narratives, annotated for emotional valence over time. The complex narratives and naturalistic expressions in this dataset provide a challenging test for contemporary time-series emotion recognition models. We demonstrate several baseline and state-of-the-art modeling approaches on the SEND, including a Long Short-Term Memory model and a multimodal Variational Recurrent Neural Network, which perform comparably to the human-benchmark. We end by discussing the implications for future research in time-series affective computing.

Yaqi Xie, Indu P Bodala, Desmond C. Ong et al.

In this paper, we present results from a human-subject study designed to explore two facets of human mental models of robots---inferred capability and intention---and their relationship to overall trust and eventual decisions. In particular, we examine delegation situations characterized by uncertainty, and explore how inferred capability and intention are applied across different tasks. We develop an online survey where human participants decide whether to delegate control to a simulated UAV agent. Our study shows that human estimations of robot capability and intent correlate strongly with overall self-reported trust. However, overall trust is not independently sufficient to determine whether a human will decide to trust (delegate) a given task to a robot. Instead, our study reveals that estimations of robot intention, capability, and overall trust are integrated when deciding to delegate. From a broader perspective, these results suggest that calibrating overall trust alone is insufficient; to make correct decisions, humans need (and use) multi-faceted mental models when collaborating with robots across multiple contexts.

Zhengxuan Wu, Xiyu Zhang, Tan Zhi-Xuan et al.

Attention mechanisms in deep neural networks have achieved excellent performance on sequence-prediction tasks. Here, we show that these recently-proposed attention-based mechanisms---in particular, the Transformer with its parallelizable self-attention layers, and the Memory Fusion Network with attention across modalities and time---also generalize well to multimodal time-series emotion recognition. Using a recently-introduced dataset of emotional autobiographical narratives, we adapt and apply these two attention mechanisms to predict emotional valence over time. Our models perform extremely well, in some cases reaching a performance comparable with human raters. We end with a discussion of the implications of attention mechanisms to affective computing.

Tan Zhi-Xuan, Harold Soh, Desmond C. Ong

Integrating deep learning with latent state space models has the potential to yield temporal models that are powerful, yet tractable and interpretable. Unfortunately, current models are not designed to handle missing data or multiple data modalities, which are both prevalent in real-world data. In this work, we introduce a factorized inference method for Multimodal Deep Markov Models (MDMMs), allowing us to filter and smooth in the presence of missing data, while also performing uncertainty-aware multimodal fusion. We derive this method by factorizing the posterior p(z|x) for non-linear state space models, and develop a variational backward-forward algorithm for inference. Because our method handles incompleteness over both time and modalities, it is capable of interpolation, extrapolation, conditional generation, label prediction, and weakly supervised learning of multimodal time series. We demonstrate these capabilities on both synthetic and real-world multimodal data under high levels of data deletion. Our method performs well even with more than 50% missing data, and outperforms existing deep approaches to inference in latent time series.

Desmond C. Ong, Harold Soh, Jamil Zaki et al.

Affective Computing is a rapidly growing field spurred by advancements in artificial intelligence, but often, held back by the inability to translate psychological theories of emotion into tractable computational models. To address this, we propose a probabilistic programming approach to affective computing, which models psychological-grounded theories as generative models of emotion, and implements them as stochastic, executable computer programs. We first review probabilistic approaches that integrate reasoning about emotions with reasoning about other latent mental states (e.g., beliefs, desires) in context. Recently-developed probabilistic programming languages offer several key desidarata over previous approaches, such as: (i) flexibility in representing emotions and emotional processes; (ii) modularity and compositionality; (iii) integration with deep learning libraries that facilitate efficient inference and learning from large, naturalistic data; and (iv) ease of adoption. Furthermore, using a probabilistic programming framework allows a standardized platform for theory-building and experimentation: Competing theories (e.g., of appraisal or other emotional processes) can be easily compared via modular substitution of code followed by model comparison. To jumpstart adoption, we illustrate our points with executable code that researchers can easily modify for their own models. We end with a discussion of applications and future directions of the probabilistic programming approach.

Zhi-Xuan Tan, Arushi Goel, Thanh-Son Nguyen et al.

People naturally understand the emotions of-and often also empathize with-those around them. In this paper, we predict the emotional valence of an empathic listener over time as they listen to a speaker narrating a life story. We use the dataset provided by the OMG-Empathy Prediction Challenge, a workshop held in conjunction with IEEE FG 2019. We present a multimodal LSTM model with feature-level fusion and local attention that predicts empathic responses from audio, text, and visual features. Our best-performing model, which used only the audio and text features, achieved a concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) of 0.29 and 0.32 on the Validation set for the Generalized and Personalized track respectively, and achieved a CCC of 0.14 and 0.14 on the held-out Test set. We discuss the difficulties faced and the lessons learnt tackling this challenge.