A Validated Grading Scale for Marionette Lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Melomental folds, or marionette lines, are one of the consequences of facial aging. The curvilinear wrinkles formed because of facial movements and the aging process extend downward from the oral commissures. OBJECTIVES To develop the Marionette Lines Grading Scale for objective quantification of the severity of melomental folds and to establish the reliability of this photonumeric scale for clinical research and practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS A 5-point photonumeric rating scale was developed to objectively quantify the severity of melomental folds. Nine experts rated photographs of 35 subjects, twice, with regard to marionette lines in comparison with morphed images. Inter- and intrarater variability was assessed by computing intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS The agreement between the experts was high. Bubble plots (bivariate scatter plots) demonstrated linearity in judgment by the experts. CONCLUSION The 5-point photonumeric scale generated spans the severity of marionette lines for which patients commonly seek correction. The scale is well stratified for consistent rating.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".