MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415942975 · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100863

Modeling the relationship between 3D facial features and human binary sex categorization in young Chinese adults

2025· article· en· W4415942975 on OpenAlexaff
Yuqian Wang, Xinyu Shi, Yan Luximon

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers in Human Behavior Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersResearch Grants Council, University Grants Committee
KeywordsCategorizationPerceptionFace (sociological concept)Facial expressionSimilarity (geometry)Feature (linguistics)CognitionAvatar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New technologies, such as VR and AR, allow individuals to interact with digital avatars in increasingly realistic ways. As these applications become more widespread, it is important to understand how humans perceive 3D avatars and their facial features. People usually undergo a rapid unconscious cognitive sex categorization process when they begin to interact with new 3D characters. In this study, we used a sex categorization task to investigate how the human brain perceives 3D facial features under different conditions and to uncover how it carries out human binary sex categorization. With 20 young Chinese adult participants in our study, we aimed to reveal how key factors (3D facial shape, texture, and display method) affect human perceptions of binary sex and related facial feature differences. Using regression and PCA reconstruction, we developed a perceived sexual dimorphism model based on the participants' responses. The cosine similarity and difference modeling revealed a clear deviation from biological dimorphism, indicating that human perceptions simplify facial features, primarily focusing on the cheek region. Additionally, a repeated measures ANOVA and post hoc tests showed that dynamic videos with realistic textures yielded the most accurate sex categorization based on facial shape. In contrast, face stimuli lacking texture led to a noticeable male bias, indicating the importance of balanced texture on characters' faces. This work bridges a critical gap regarding human perceptions of 3D characters’ faces, offering valuable insights into creating 3D characters that are perceptually accurate and socially effective.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueComputers in Human Behavior ReportsSame topicEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorFrench-language works237,207