MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186370141 · doi:10.1037/xhp0000920

Image reconstruction reveals the impact of aging on face perception.

2021· article· en· W3186370141 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chi-Hsun Chang, Dan Nemrodov, Natalia Drobotenko, Maryam Sorkhou, Adrian Nestor, Andy Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFace (sociological concept)PerceptionComputer visionArtificial intelligenceFace perceptionPsychologyComputer scienceSociologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive work has demonstrated an age-related decline in face recognition, but the nature and the extent of aging-related alterations in face representations remain unclear. Here, we address these issues using an image reconstruction approach to reveal the content of visual representations. Healthy young and older adults provided similarity judgments for pairs of face images. Facial shape and surface features were subsequently derived and combined into image reconstructions of facial appearance. Both objective and experimental evaluations revealed that reconstructions were successful for every participant. Critically, shape and surface properties, such as eye shape and skin tone, were less accurately represented in older than young individuals. Yet, age-related differences in face representations, though significant, were less pronounced than those due to individual variability. Our results provide novel insights into age-related changes in visual perception and demonstrate the utility of image reconstruction to uncovering internal representations across a variety of populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & PerformanceSame topicFace recognition and analysisFrench-language works237,207