protomogger9873
Platinum
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2024
- Posts
- 1,086
- Reputation
- 1,125
Toy Model: Impact of Muscularity on PSL Scale
--------------------------------------------------------
This document summarizes a simple statistical model that estimates how improvements in
body composition (from training) affect an individual's overall attractiveness expressed
on the 1‑8 PSL scale. The core idea: a fitter body helps everyone, but its benefit is
magnified when the face is already attractive.
1. Variables
------------
Note: z-score = X standard deviations above mean of population (i.e in USA, z-score=1 means you are one SD above mean, or 84 percentile/5’11.5. Z-score=0 means you are the MEAN, therefore 0 standard deviations above mean, 50th percentile, 5’9).
• F – Baseline facial PSL (1‑8); each point ≈ +1 SD
• Z_f – Facial z‑score (Z_f = F – 4; PSL 4 = 0 SD, PSL 5 = 1 SD, …)
• H – Height z‑score (0 ≈ population mean)
• B – Body‑composition improvement in SD (0 = untrained baseline)
2. Core formulae
----------------
Z_total = Z_f + a (1 + b *Z_f) B + c H
Overall PSL = 4 + Z_total (clamp final value to the 1‑8 range)
Default constants:
a = 0.35 (baseline payoff of a +1 SD physique gain)
b = 0.30 (how strongly that payoff is multiplied by better facial aesthetics)
c = 0.20 (contribution of height)
The multiplier term (1 + b Z_f) amplifies the physique bonus for good faces (Z_f > 0)
and dampens it for poor faces (Z_f < 0).
3. Worked examples
------------------
• Average Joe starts lifting
F = 4, H = 0, B = 1
→ PSL ≈ 4.4 (gain ≈ +0.4)
• Handsome guy gets ripped
F = 6, H = +0.5, B = 1.5
→ PSL ≈ 7.0 (gain ≈ +1.0)
• Unattractive man maximises body
F = 2, H = 0, B = 2
→ PSL ≈ 2.3 (gain ≈ +0.3)
4. Tuning & extensions
----------------------
• Adjust a, b, c to match empirical data or personal judgement.
• Replace B with a logarithmic function to accurately graph the diminishing returns of natty lifting.
• Add other terms (+d S for style, +e G for grooming, other softmaxxes) as needed. I can maybe add these for formula V2.
Interpretation
--------------
Because every component is expressed in standard‑deviation (z‑score) space, each unit
increase corresponds to roughly one PSL point. The model therefore offers an intuitive,
but elementary way to gauge how face, body, and height interact in overall physical attractiveness.
I assumed that gymcelling has a greater effect on someone with higher PSL than someone with less PSL due to facial aesthetics and the “cap” on physiquemaxxing determined by face. In the sense that DIFFERENCE in PSL of Barrett gymmaxxing > DIFFERENCE in PSL of st. bo2 gymmaxxing
Attached below is a programmed Excel spreadsheet to calculate the effect gymcelling can provide, toy around with it and let me know what you think.
Link to excel: https://jmp.sh/s/wooQ0v9gN5Q7eCf8i0Md
--------------------------------------------------------
This document summarizes a simple statistical model that estimates how improvements in
body composition (from training) affect an individual's overall attractiveness expressed
on the 1‑8 PSL scale. The core idea: a fitter body helps everyone, but its benefit is
magnified when the face is already attractive.
1. Variables
------------
Note: z-score = X standard deviations above mean of population (i.e in USA, z-score=1 means you are one SD above mean, or 84 percentile/5’11.5. Z-score=0 means you are the MEAN, therefore 0 standard deviations above mean, 50th percentile, 5’9).
• F – Baseline facial PSL (1‑8); each point ≈ +1 SD
• Z_f – Facial z‑score (Z_f = F – 4; PSL 4 = 0 SD, PSL 5 = 1 SD, …)
• H – Height z‑score (0 ≈ population mean)
• B – Body‑composition improvement in SD (0 = untrained baseline)
2. Core formulae
----------------
Z_total = Z_f + a (1 + b *Z_f) B + c H
Overall PSL = 4 + Z_total (clamp final value to the 1‑8 range)
Default constants:
a = 0.35 (baseline payoff of a +1 SD physique gain)
b = 0.30 (how strongly that payoff is multiplied by better facial aesthetics)
c = 0.20 (contribution of height)
The multiplier term (1 + b Z_f) amplifies the physique bonus for good faces (Z_f > 0)
and dampens it for poor faces (Z_f < 0).
3. Worked examples
------------------
• Average Joe starts lifting
F = 4, H = 0, B = 1
→ PSL ≈ 4.4 (gain ≈ +0.4)
• Handsome guy gets ripped
F = 6, H = +0.5, B = 1.5
→ PSL ≈ 7.0 (gain ≈ +1.0)
• Unattractive man maximises body
F = 2, H = 0, B = 2
→ PSL ≈ 2.3 (gain ≈ +0.3)
4. Tuning & extensions
----------------------
• Adjust a, b, c to match empirical data or personal judgement.
• Replace B with a logarithmic function to accurately graph the diminishing returns of natty lifting.
• Add other terms (+d S for style, +e G for grooming, other softmaxxes) as needed. I can maybe add these for formula V2.
Interpretation
--------------
Because every component is expressed in standard‑deviation (z‑score) space, each unit
increase corresponds to roughly one PSL point. The model therefore offers an intuitive,
but elementary way to gauge how face, body, and height interact in overall physical attractiveness.
I assumed that gymcelling has a greater effect on someone with higher PSL than someone with less PSL due to facial aesthetics and the “cap” on physiquemaxxing determined by face. In the sense that DIFFERENCE in PSL of Barrett gymmaxxing > DIFFERENCE in PSL of st. bo2 gymmaxxing
Attached below is a programmed Excel spreadsheet to calculate the effect gymcelling can provide, toy around with it and let me know what you think.
Link to excel: https://jmp.sh/s/wooQ0v9gN5Q7eCf8i0Md
Last edited:
. Sexy high iq thread tho repped
