Generalizing Duchenne to sad expressions with binocular rivalry and perception ratings.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Discrete emotion theories emphasize the modularity of facial expressions, while functionalist theories suggest that a single facial action may have a common meaning across expressions. Smiles involving the Duchenne marker, eye constriction causing crow's feet, are perceived as intensely positive and sincere. To test whether the Duchenne marker is a general index of intensity and sincerity, we contrasted positive and negative expressions with and without the Duchenne marker in a binocular rivalry paradigm. Both smiles and sad expressions involving the Duchenne marker were perceived longer than non-Duchenne expressions, and participants rated all Duchenne expressions as more affectively intense and more sincere than their non-Duchenne counterparts. Correlations between perceptual dominance and ratings suggested that the Duchenne marker increased the dominance of smiles and sad expressions by increasing their perceived affective intensity. The results provide evidence in favor of Darwin's hypothesis that specific facial actions have a general function (conveying affect intensification and sincerity) across expressions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".