MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285274205 · doi:10.54364/aaiml.2022.1126

Transfer Learning to Detect Age From Handwriting

2022· article· en· W4285274205 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHandwritingComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceFeature extractionFeature (linguistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Natural language processingSpeech recognitionLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Handwriting analysis is the science of determining an individual’s personality from his or her handwriting by assessing features such as slant, pen pressure, word spacing, and other factors. Handwriting analysis has a wide range of uses and applications, including dating and socialising, roommates and landlords, business and professional, employee hiring, and human resources. This study used the ResNet and GoogleNet CNN architectures as fixed feature extractors from handwriting samples. SVM was used to classify the writer’s gender and age based on the extracted features. We built an Arabic dataset named FSHS to analyse and test the proposed system. In the gender detection system, applying the automatic feature extraction method to the FSHS dataset produced accuracy rates of 84.9% and 82.2% using ResNet and GoogleNet, respectively. While the age detection system using the automatic feature extraction method achieved accuracy rates of 69.7% and 61.1% using ResNet and GoogleNet, respectively

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.266 · 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