Person's discriminating visual features for recognising gender: LASSO regression model and feature analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gender is one of the demographic attributes of a person, which is considered as a soft trait in the area of biometric. Several studies have been conducted to extract gender information based on a person's face image, gait pattern, fingerprint, iris, speech and hand geometry. In this paper, we concentrate on predicting gender using a person's image aesthetic, which has never been studied before. We propose a visual preference model for discriminating males from females using LASSO regression. The preference model uses 57 dimensional feature vector containing 14 different perceptual image features. The model is evaluated on a database of 34,000 images from 170 Flickr users (110 males and 60 females). Results show that maximum and average accuracy of predicting gender are around 91.67% and 84.38%, respectively, on 100 random sampling of training and testing datasets. The proposed method outperforms all existing state-of-the-art methods. In this paper, we also address two important research questions: which features are impacting the discrimination of male-female visual preferences and how many images are sufficient for predicting a person's gender.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".