Recognizing identity in the face of change: The development of an expression-independent representation of facial identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perceptual aftereffects have indicated that there is an asymmetry in the extent to which adults' representations of identity and expression are independent of one another. Their representation of expression is identity-dependent; the magnitude of expression aftereffects is reduced when the adaptation and test stimuli have different identities. In contrast, their representation of identity is expression-independent; the magnitude of identity aftereffects is independent of whether the adaptation and test stimuli pose the same expressions. Like adults, children's representation of expression is identity-dependent (Vida & Mondloch, 2009). Here we investigated whether they have an expression-dependent representation of facial identity. Adults and 8-year-olds (n = 20 per group) categorized faces in an identity continuum (Sue/Jen) after viewing an adapting stimulus that displayed the same or a different emotional expression. Both groups showed identity aftereffects that were not influenced by facial expression. We conclude that, like adults, 8-year-old children's representation of identity is expression-independent.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".