MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406745964 · doi:10.18280/isi.300117

Identifying the Personality Traits Using Handwriting Recognition in a Real-Time Environment

2025· article· en· W4406745964 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shalaka Deore, Pranjal Kalokhe, Sneha Patil, Sayali Nagarkar, Vidhi Oswal

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHandwritingBig Five personality traitsPersonalityPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCognitive psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional methods of personality assessment, such as questionnaires and interviews, rely on self-reporting and subjective interpretation, which can be influenced by biases and social desirability.A handwriting-based approach offers an alternative method that provides nonverbal cues and unconscious expressions, supplementing traditional methods and potentially offering more objective insights, especially with an automated approach, into personality traits.Non-real-time methods take longer due to manual analysis, and are often subjective and prone to bias, while real-time analysis with a convolutional neural network (CNN) model provides instant results.Real-time tools would have no human intervention, are more convenient and easily accessible.Reducing human intervention through real-time analysis with a CNN model enhances the reliability, objectivity, scalability, and speed of the handwriting assessment process, providing a significant advantage over traditional methods.The proposed system focuses on the use of deep learning (DL) techniques to determine a person's personality by analyzing their handwriting.With the use of deep learning, human intervention is much less, thus the variance in the results is also much less which ultimately increases precision in the final predictions or results.Not only does the project predict personality traits through handwriting analysis, but also does that in a realtime environment.Steps such as preprocessing, feature extraction, and label classification are involved in the prediction process.CNN model has been used in the proposed system, for the final Personality Prediction.The CNN model for handwriting analysis must balance speed and accuracy through efficient architecture design and parameter optimization, minimizing computational complexity and inference time.To achieve this challenge two models (or versions) were built, the second having better data augmentation with respect to image sizing to be given to the CNN Network.Performance using the evaluation metrics was calculated with a testing efficiency of 0.71 in model 1 and 0.74 in model 2 and 82% accuracy was obtained on this real-time data.

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 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 score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207