buccalfatremoval
KHHV
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2024
- Posts
- 1,736
- Reputation
- 2,183
Alright bhais this is kinda high effort (especially because i feel like shit) so have fun reading 
INTRODUCTION
Human faces are sexually dimorphic in shape and features, hence the obvious facial differences between a male and female.
Male faces tend to have more sloped foreheads, more prominent brows, larger noses, and wider chins, whereas female faces have more vertical foreheads, fuller cheeks, and tapered chins, and body wise male bodies often have a wider bidelt, narrower hip, better fat distribution, and bigger bodies. Whereas females have a narrower frame, wider hips, naturally carry more fat and usually smaller in size.
Within each sex, individuals vary in their expression of these sexually dimorphic traits so facial sexual dimorphism is a continuous trait, with variations linked to processes in development.
However studies in this field have been commonly conflicting (at least from what I’ve seen).
Various concepts of facial sexual dimorphism have been proposed including subjective ratings of perceived “masculinity” and “femininity”, as well as objective measurements of facial shape dimorphism
Perceived ratings typically have a low to moderate correlation with underlying shape differences between the sexes, and they are influenced by psychological and cultural factos.
Researchers use various ways to measure dimorphism, One category of methods uses linear distances, angles, or ratios measured between a set of anatomical landmarks that differ significantly between males and females. The fwthr is by far the most commonly used measure in this category. Males are reported to have shorter midfaces relative to their facial width than females causing it to be a common way to differentiate between dimorphism.
Some researchers have developed a method that combined zygo prominence and relative lower facial height by converting both measurements to zscores and adding them to produce a single index.
A second category of methods try to capture the entire facial sexual dimorphism. These measures which can be taken from sets of linear distances like landmark configurations or photographic measurements attempt to quantify facial sexual dimorphism without making a priori hypotheses about which features contribute most to male female shape difference.
Geometric morphometric analysis of two or 3D coordinates is a popular approach that falls into this category.
Height is also an important factor when measuring dimorphism due to it being directly linked to skull development.
Taller people tend to have larger, longer, and more prognathic faces.
METHODS
There are many ways I’ll go over some.
The most common and easiest way is through visual analysis, The shape of the skull is one of the most important. The male skull has squarer and lower eye sockets, while the female skull has rounder and higher eye sockets. And as I mentioned earlier the male skull has more pronounced brow ridges and a protrusion at the top of the eyebrows, while in contrast females have a larger and rounder eye socket, much more rounded forehead and not so bony brow ridge.
(Interesting fact this is due to them not contributing in hunting rituals but instead caring for children so it resulted in this skull development to further emphasize facial expression communication to infants and so.)
this one study used mandibular measurements, I’ll provide what they measured and the results.
Tubercle: A small bony elevation of inferior margin of ramus of the mandible
Coronion: The craniometric landmark on coronoid process of the mandible
Maximum ramus breadth (MxRB): Measured from anterior most point of the ramus and line connecting the posterior most point on condyle and angle of mandible
Minimum ramus breadth (MiRB): Smallest anteroposterior breadth of the ramus
Condylar height (CH)/maximum ramus height: Ramus height of the mandible from the superior most point on condyle to the tubercle or most projected part of the lower border of the ramus
Projective height of ramus (PHTR): Point between the highest part of the mandibular condyle and lowest border of the bone
Coronoid height (CoH): Measurement from coronion and lower part of the bone.
For visual reference.
D1: The distance from the bottom of the mental foramen (small hole in the lower jaw) to the bottom edge of the mandible (jawbone).
D2: The distance from the top of the mental foramen to the top edge of the alveolar crest (the part of the jaw that holds the teeth).
D3: The distance from the mandibular notch (dip at the top of the jawbone) to the top edge of the mandibular foramen (opening on the inner side of the jaw).
D4: The distance from the mandibular notch to the bottom edge of the mandibular ramus (vertical back part of the jaw).
The results are as followed:
The statistics the researchers test showed males have higher values for all measurements, and all variables showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.001), with males having larger measurements on both sides of the mandible. The measurements showing the highest sexual dimorphism were PHTR, followed by CH and CoH. The mean values for males and females were also illustrated using bar diagrams.
I’ll provide them below.
DFemale: − 148.0750 + 2.2010 (MxRB) + 0.1890 (MiRB) + 2.2130 (CH) + 0.1930 (PHTR) + 1.3830 (CoH).
DFemale: −132.5450 + 1.3910 (MxRB) + 1.3680 (MiRB) + 2.2900 (CH) − 0.0340 (PHTR) + 0.9100 (CoH).
the distance between the superior margins of the mental foramen to the inferior border of the mandible (SM-IB), the distance between the inferior margins of the mental foramen to the inferior border of the mandible (IM-IB), and the distance between the superior margin of the mental foramen to the alveolar crest (SM-AC) showed statistically significant values and helps in discriminating males from females.
This other study used orbitals as a way to measure dimorphism, the study was ran on 120 skulls of unknown age.
Three anatomists (G.Tr., M.P., and G.Ts.) conducted the anatomical investigations (Figure 1). The following orbital measurements were recorded: orbit width (OW), orbit height (OH), infraorbital distance (IOD), extraorbital distance (EOD), optic foramen width (OFW), optic foramen height (OFH), optic canal width (OCW), and optic canal height (OCH).
The orbit index (OI) was calculated as:
OI=OHOW×100OI=OWOH×100
The optic canal index (OCI) was calculated as:
OCI=OCHOCW×100OCI=OCWOCH×100
The optic foramen index (OFI) was calculated as:
OFI=OFHOFW×100OFI=OFWOFH×100
with each measurement repeated twice and recorded to an accuracy of 0.1 mm.
Blue (females, orange (males).
The results of the research weren’t significant between the sexes, only significant differences in the left OCW (p = 0.003), the EOD (p = 0.040), and the left OW (p = 0.010).
Another study used tomographic scans of the maxilla and mandible from 100 patients using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). Measurements included inter premolar width, inter molar width, maxillary width, inter pterygoid width, nasal cavity width, nostril width, and maxillary length.
Several machine learning algorithms were used to develop predictive models, not going to mention them couldn’t be bothered but I’ll mention some in the results
Another research (which I’m really into) measured dimorphism between different phenotypes.
I recommend reading it yourself as it’s quite long.
It’s named Measuring Sexual Dimorphism With a Race–Gender Face Space by David E. Huber, university of Massachusetts, Amherst.
“Okay buccal that’s cool and all but how can we measure dimorphism at home without all this fancy shmancy bullshit?”
Alright the best way to effectively measure dimorphism at home is as follows.
We’re simply going to analyze.
I believe someone already inserted these ratios in their guide but I’ll state them again.
Neck to Jaw Ratio: 90-100%
Jaw Frontal Angle: 84.6° - 95°
Midface ratio: 0.95-1.01
Jaw to Cheekbone Ratio: 86% - 92%
Canthal Tilt: Positive tilt between 5.2° - 5.8°
Chin to Philtrum Ratio: 2.05 - 2.55
Lower Third Proportion: 30.6% - 35% of total facial height
Facial Thirds Harmony: between 31.5% - 34.5% of the total height.
FWHR (Facial Width to Height Ratio): 1.85 - 1.9
TFWHR (Total Facial Width to Height Ratio):1.33 - 1.38
Eye Aspect Ratio: 2.8 - 3.6
Technique: Use a vernier caliper or photograph yourself with a neutral expression at eye level, then analyze the image using digital tools (like ImageJ) to get precise landmark measurements.
As for body measurements.
Shoulder to waist ratio: 1.618
Waist to hip (WHR): 0.80-0.85
2D:4D Digit Ratio: below 0.94
Voice pitch: 85-100hz
Other easy ways to tell someone is of high dimorphism (it would be obvious just looking at them), is a fully developed skull, outward gonions, square projected chin, projected zygos, well developed temples, dense brow ridge, sloped forehead, straight hairline, supras, ideal eye hooding, dense low set thick eyebrows, and usually a more outward projected nose.
These are the ideal dimorphic ratios we are chasing.
Kinda useful to know how to measure your face.
Kinda got lazy at the end sorry
INTRODUCTION
Human faces are sexually dimorphic in shape and features, hence the obvious facial differences between a male and female.
Male faces tend to have more sloped foreheads, more prominent brows, larger noses, and wider chins, whereas female faces have more vertical foreheads, fuller cheeks, and tapered chins, and body wise male bodies often have a wider bidelt, narrower hip, better fat distribution, and bigger bodies. Whereas females have a narrower frame, wider hips, naturally carry more fat and usually smaller in size.
Within each sex, individuals vary in their expression of these sexually dimorphic traits so facial sexual dimorphism is a continuous trait, with variations linked to processes in development.
However studies in this field have been commonly conflicting (at least from what I’ve seen).
Various concepts of facial sexual dimorphism have been proposed including subjective ratings of perceived “masculinity” and “femininity”, as well as objective measurements of facial shape dimorphism
Perceived ratings typically have a low to moderate correlation with underlying shape differences between the sexes, and they are influenced by psychological and cultural factos.
Researchers use various ways to measure dimorphism, One category of methods uses linear distances, angles, or ratios measured between a set of anatomical landmarks that differ significantly between males and females. The fwthr is by far the most commonly used measure in this category. Males are reported to have shorter midfaces relative to their facial width than females causing it to be a common way to differentiate between dimorphism.
Some researchers have developed a method that combined zygo prominence and relative lower facial height by converting both measurements to zscores and adding them to produce a single index.
A second category of methods try to capture the entire facial sexual dimorphism. These measures which can be taken from sets of linear distances like landmark configurations or photographic measurements attempt to quantify facial sexual dimorphism without making a priori hypotheses about which features contribute most to male female shape difference.
Geometric morphometric analysis of two or 3D coordinates is a popular approach that falls into this category.
Height is also an important factor when measuring dimorphism due to it being directly linked to skull development.
Taller people tend to have larger, longer, and more prognathic faces.
METHODS
There are many ways I’ll go over some.
The most common and easiest way is through visual analysis, The shape of the skull is one of the most important. The male skull has squarer and lower eye sockets, while the female skull has rounder and higher eye sockets. And as I mentioned earlier the male skull has more pronounced brow ridges and a protrusion at the top of the eyebrows, while in contrast females have a larger and rounder eye socket, much more rounded forehead and not so bony brow ridge.
(Interesting fact this is due to them not contributing in hunting rituals but instead caring for children so it resulted in this skull development to further emphasize facial expression communication to infants and so.)
this one study used mandibular measurements, I’ll provide what they measured and the results.
Tubercle: A small bony elevation of inferior margin of ramus of the mandible
Coronion: The craniometric landmark on coronoid process of the mandible
Maximum ramus breadth (MxRB): Measured from anterior most point of the ramus and line connecting the posterior most point on condyle and angle of mandible
Minimum ramus breadth (MiRB): Smallest anteroposterior breadth of the ramus
Condylar height (CH)/maximum ramus height: Ramus height of the mandible from the superior most point on condyle to the tubercle or most projected part of the lower border of the ramus
Projective height of ramus (PHTR): Point between the highest part of the mandibular condyle and lowest border of the bone
Coronoid height (CoH): Measurement from coronion and lower part of the bone.
For visual reference.
D1: The distance from the bottom of the mental foramen (small hole in the lower jaw) to the bottom edge of the mandible (jawbone).
D2: The distance from the top of the mental foramen to the top edge of the alveolar crest (the part of the jaw that holds the teeth).
D3: The distance from the mandibular notch (dip at the top of the jawbone) to the top edge of the mandibular foramen (opening on the inner side of the jaw).
D4: The distance from the mandibular notch to the bottom edge of the mandibular ramus (vertical back part of the jaw).
The results are as followed:
The statistics the researchers test showed males have higher values for all measurements, and all variables showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.001), with males having larger measurements on both sides of the mandible. The measurements showing the highest sexual dimorphism were PHTR, followed by CH and CoH. The mean values for males and females were also illustrated using bar diagrams.
I’ll provide them below.
On the right side
DMale: − 175.6300 + 2.3680 (MxRB) + 0.2560 (MiRB) + 2.0640 (CH) + 0.6130 (PHTR) + 1.4520 (CoH)DFemale: − 148.0750 + 2.2010 (MxRB) + 0.1890 (MiRB) + 2.2130 (CH) + 0.1930 (PHTR) + 1.3830 (CoH).
On the left side
DMale: − 157.4930 + 1.4510 (MxRB) + 1.3930 (MiRB) + 2.4600 (CH) + 0.0870 (PHTR) + 0.9840 (CoH)DFemale: −132.5450 + 1.3910 (MxRB) + 1.3680 (MiRB) + 2.2900 (CH) − 0.0340 (PHTR) + 0.9100 (CoH).
the distance between the superior margins of the mental foramen to the inferior border of the mandible (SM-IB), the distance between the inferior margins of the mental foramen to the inferior border of the mandible (IM-IB), and the distance between the superior margin of the mental foramen to the alveolar crest (SM-AC) showed statistically significant values and helps in discriminating males from females.
This other study used orbitals as a way to measure dimorphism, the study was ran on 120 skulls of unknown age.
Three anatomists (G.Tr., M.P., and G.Ts.) conducted the anatomical investigations (Figure 1). The following orbital measurements were recorded: orbit width (OW), orbit height (OH), infraorbital distance (IOD), extraorbital distance (EOD), optic foramen width (OFW), optic foramen height (OFH), optic canal width (OCW), and optic canal height (OCH).
The orbit index (OI) was calculated as:
OI=OHOW×100OI=OWOH×100
The optic canal index (OCI) was calculated as:
OCI=OCHOCW×100OCI=OCWOCH×100
The optic foramen index (OFI) was calculated as:
OFI=OFHOFW×100OFI=OFWOFH×100
with each measurement repeated twice and recorded to an accuracy of 0.1 mm.
The results of the research weren’t significant between the sexes, only significant differences in the left OCW (p = 0.003), the EOD (p = 0.040), and the left OW (p = 0.010).
Another study used tomographic scans of the maxilla and mandible from 100 patients using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). Measurements included inter premolar width, inter molar width, maxillary width, inter pterygoid width, nasal cavity width, nostril width, and maxillary length.
Several machine learning algorithms were used to develop predictive models, not going to mention them couldn’t be bothered but I’ll mention some in the results
The results.
Univariate analysis showed statistically significant differences (p < 0.10) for all skeletal and dental measurements. Nostril width was the most important variable in two models, while inter molar width was the most significant dental measurement. The predictive models achieved accuracy values between 0.75 and 0.85. Logistic Regression, Random Forest, Decision Tree, and SVM showed the highest AUC values, while SVM demonstrated the most consistent performance between cross validation and test data.Another research (which I’m really into) measured dimorphism between different phenotypes.
I recommend reading it yourself as it’s quite long.
It’s named Measuring Sexual Dimorphism With a Race–Gender Face Space by David E. Huber, university of Massachusetts, Amherst.
“Okay buccal that’s cool and all but how can we measure dimorphism at home without all this fancy shmancy bullshit?”
Alright the best way to effectively measure dimorphism at home is as follows.
We’re simply going to analyze.
I believe someone already inserted these ratios in their guide but I’ll state them again.
Neck to Jaw Ratio: 90-100%
Jaw Frontal Angle: 84.6° - 95°
Midface ratio: 0.95-1.01
Jaw to Cheekbone Ratio: 86% - 92%
Canthal Tilt: Positive tilt between 5.2° - 5.8°
Chin to Philtrum Ratio: 2.05 - 2.55
Lower Third Proportion: 30.6% - 35% of total facial height
Facial Thirds Harmony: between 31.5% - 34.5% of the total height.
FWHR (Facial Width to Height Ratio): 1.85 - 1.9
TFWHR (Total Facial Width to Height Ratio):1.33 - 1.38
Eye Aspect Ratio: 2.8 - 3.6
Technique: Use a vernier caliper or photograph yourself with a neutral expression at eye level, then analyze the image using digital tools (like ImageJ) to get precise landmark measurements.
As for body measurements.
Shoulder to waist ratio: 1.618
Waist to hip (WHR): 0.80-0.85
2D:4D Digit Ratio: below 0.94
Voice pitch: 85-100hz
Other easy ways to tell someone is of high dimorphism (it would be obvious just looking at them), is a fully developed skull, outward gonions, square projected chin, projected zygos, well developed temples, dense brow ridge, sloped forehead, straight hairline, supras, ideal eye hooding, dense low set thick eyebrows, and usually a more outward projected nose.
These are the ideal dimorphic ratios we are chasing.
Kinda useful to know how to measure your face.
Kinda got lazy at the end sorry
