<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>A Replication Study: Machine Learning Models Are Capable of Predicting Sexual Orientation From Facial Images · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1902.10739/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1902.10739/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>A Replication Study: Machine Learning Models Are Capable of Predicting Sexual Orientation From Facial Images — mentioned by czr</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19660806</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1902.10739:19660806</guid><pubDate>Sun, 14 Apr 2019 18:15:53 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;This title (&amp;#x27;The infamous “AI gaydar” study was repeated – couln&amp;#x27;t be reproduced&amp;#x27;) is very incorrect; it does not correctly summarize either the linked article or the actual paper (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1902.10739.pdf) that the article is discussing. From the abstract on the actual paper: &amp;gt; Using a new dataset of 20,910 photographs from dating websites, the ability to predict sexual orientation is confirmed... While demonstrating that dating profile images carry rich information about sexual orientation these results leave open the question of how much is determined by facial morphology and…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1902.10739/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item><item><title>A Replication Study: Machine Learning Models Are Capable of Predicting Sexual Orientation From Facial Images — mentioned by DanAndersen</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19660595</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1902.10739:19660595</guid><pubDate>Sun, 14 Apr 2019 17:34:56 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;This is true, which is why machine learning has long since learned to not even think of what you describe as a meaningful measure of accuracy. If you look at the linked paper [0], you&amp;#x27;ll find that the author uses the &amp;quot;ROC AUC&amp;quot; metric [1]: &amp;gt;The ROC AUC score represents the probability that when given one randomly chosen positive instance and one randomly chosen negative instance, the classifier will correctly identify the positive instance [0] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1902.10739.pdf [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receiver_operating_characteris...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1902.10739/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item></channel></rss>
