Biometric Pattern Recognition from Social Media Aesthetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Online social media (OSN) has witnessed a significant growth over past decade. Millions of people now share their thoughts, emotions, preferences, opinions and aesthetic information in the form of images, videos, music, texts, blogs and emoticons. Recently, due to existence of person specific traits in media data, researchers started to investigate such traits with the goal of biometric pattern analysis and recognition. Until now, gender recognition from image aesthetics has not been explored in the biometric community. In this paper, the authors present an authentic model for gender recognition, based on the discriminating visual features found in user favorite images. They validate the model on a publicly shared database consisting of 24,000 images provided by 120 Flickr (image based OSN) users. The authors propose the method based on the mixture of experts model to estimate the discriminating hyperplane from 56 dimensional aesthetic feature space. The experts are based on k-nearest neighbor, support vector machine and decision tree methods. To improve the model accuracy, they apply a systematic feature selection using statistical two sampled t-test. Moreover, the authors provide statistical feature analysis with graph visualization to show discriminating behavior between male and female for each feature. The proposed method achieves 77% accuracy in predicting gender, which is 5% better than recently reported results.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".