ArticleComputational brain & behavior2025
Comparing Activation Typicality and Sparsity in a Deep CNN to Predict Facial Beauty.
Article in Computational brain & behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Processing fluency, which describes the subjective sensation of ease with which information is processed by the sensory systems and the brain, has become one of the most popular explanations of aesthetic appreciation and beauty. Two metrics have recently been proposed to model fluency: the sparsity of neuronal activation, which describes the concentration of activity in a subset of neurons, and the statistical typicality of activations, which describes how well the encoding of a stimulus matches a reference representation of stimuli of the category to which it belongs. Using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) as a model for the human visual system, this study compares the ability of these metrics to explain variation in facial attractiveness. Our findings show that the sparsity of neuronal activations is a more robust predictor of facial attractiveness than statistical typicality. Refining the reference representation to a single ethnicity or gender does not increase the explanatory power of statistical typicality. However, statistical typicality and sparsity predict facial beauty based on different layers of the CNNs, suggesting that they describe different neural mechanisms underlying fluency. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42113-024-00231-7.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.