A measuring system for facial aesthetics in Caucasian adolescents: reproducibility and validity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new measuring system to judge facial aesthetics in young Caucasians is presented. The system uses sets of three photographs (one frontal, one three-quarter smiling, and one lateral) as a stimulus. Scores are performed on a visual analogue scale (VAS) with separate sets of reference photographs for girls and boys. The choice of the reference photographs was based on a panel evaluation of facial aesthetics of 40 boys and 40 girls from the archive of the orthodontic department. Reproducibility of the new measuring system was tested on a series of photographic sets (one frontal, one three-quarter smiling, and one lateral view) of 64 patients, using a panel of 78 adult laymen and 89 professionals. The panel members assessed these sets of photographs on a VAS, in relation to the reference sets. The system was shown to be reproducible. Although the intra-observer reproducibility was low, the reliability coefficient was excellent (Cronbach's alpha > or = 0.98). Validity was tested by comparing the scores on the new scales with those of the three-quarter smiling photographic views on an earlier published scale. The correlation between the ratings on the new measuring system and the earlier published scale was 0.82 for laymen and 0.77 for professionals. The new system is simple and flexible in its use, and reproducible and valid for assessing facial aesthetics in young Caucasians. The system can be used in further investigations on the evaluation of facial aesthetics.
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 | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".