A Validated Grading Scale for Forehead Lines
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As with other facial wrinkles, the gradual loss and disorganization of collagen fibers and elastin, connective tissues that provide underlying support for skin, cause horizontal forehead rhytides in large part. OBJECTIVES: To develop the Forehead Lines Grading Scale for objective quantification of horizontal forehead rhytides at rest and with expression and to establish the reliability of this photonumeric scale for clinical research and practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Forehead Lines Grading Scale is a 5-point photonumeric rating scale that was developed to objectively quantify resting (static) and hyperkinetic (dynamic) forehead lines. Inter- and intrarater variability was assessed by computing intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The agreement between the experts was highly significant. Bubble plots (bivariate scatter plots) demonstrated linearity in judgment by the experts. CONCLUSION: The 5-point photonumeric scale generated spans the severity of forehead lines for which patients commonly seek correction. The scale is well stratified for consistent rating.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it