Aligning the Incomplete: Joint Distribution Calibration for Multimodal EEG-Eye Emotion Recognition
Yang WuJinpeng Li
Oct 2026
Human-computer Interaction
Abstract
The success of cross-subject multimodal emotion recognition hinges on maintaining the consistency of the joint data distribution across individuals. However, real-world deployment frequently triggers the \emph{asymmetric joint distribution collapse}: EEG signals suffer from severe cross-subject distribution shifts, while eye movements sensors are susceptible to packet loss and tracking failures. Existing methods treat domain adaptation and missing-modality imputation as disjoint tasks. Consequently, they fail to resolve the compounded errors when both degradations co-occur, either propagating domain shifts through imputed signals or destroying the joint decision boundary. To tackle this unified challenge, we propose GUARD (\textbf{G}radient-guided \textbf{U}nsupervised \textbf{A}symmetric \textbf{R}ecovery of \textbf{D}istributions). First, GUARD establishes a reliable anchor manifold in the source domain by employing a theoretically grounded gradient-weighted objective, which forces the robust EEG modality to preemptively entangle task-discriminative ocular features. Next, to structurally recover the collapsed joint distribution, we constrain a generative module with downstream perceptual losses, prioritizing emotion-discriminative semantics over mere signal fidelity. Finally, we formulate target-domain adaptation as an ill-posed inverse problem. By driving a cycle-consistent flow, we achieve unsupervised calibration of the recovered joint distribution directly on the target-domain manifold. Extensive experiments demonstrate that GUARD significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods, maintaining resilient discriminative performance even under complete auxiliary modality failure. Our code and models are made publicly available to ensure complete reproducibility.
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The perception of the impact of agile methods is predominantly positive, and several challenge areas were discovered, but based on this study, agile methods are here to stay.
M. Laanti, O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson· Information and Software Tec...· 260 citations· ⚡20
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 7, 2026
Students in MIT’s Concourse program delve deeply into the human condition, debate challenging questions, and learn to develop judgment about issues that can’t be quantified.
Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity. The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduSep 30, 2026
Able to defeat top-ranked human players and more efficient than other models, the new system could help decision-makers in military maneuvers or business negotiations.