A validated facial grading scale: The future of facial ageing measurement tools?
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
Validated, standardized scales for measurement of ageing and response to cosmetic procedures are lacking. Numerous scales have been published and, while they allow intra-study comparisons, almost all remain non-validated, and their heterogeneity makes comparisons across studies impossible. A set of validated, objective, quantitative scales has been developed in association with experts from different specialties within aesthetic medicine. These scales allow evaluation of the key signs of ageing that cause individuals to seek cosmetic procedures. Each scale is a five-point photonumeric scale based on computer-simulated photographs incorporating each aspect to be evaluated in a stepwise manner. Validation studies show that these scales have good intra- and inter-rater reliability, with intra-class correlation coefficients generally in the range 0.85-0.95, and similar test-retest correlations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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