Pitfalls of Nonstandardized Photography in Facial Plastic Surgery Patients
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
The authors tested the hypothesis that certain maneuvers (neck flexion/extension and head protrusion/retrusion) alter the appearance of the submental area, jawline, and melolabial groove. They used a questionnaire survey of 20 naïve judges who assessed a standardized photograph album of three subjects. The subjects' faces (frontal and lateral views) were photographed in neutral, neck flexion/extension, and head protrusion/retrusion positions. High Kendall coefficients of correlation were observed in 10 of 12 questions evaluating an improvement in jawline definition with neck extension or head protrusion, as well as in 11 of 12 questions assessing decreased submental soft tissue. All questions relating to the melolabial groove had a correlation coefficient of less than 0.70. Small changes in patient positioning during photodocumentation for facial plastic surgical procedures can cause dramatic changes in the appearance of certain parameters. Standardizing patient positioning for preoperative and postoperative photographs is imperative.
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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