Anyone out there knows the truth about facial similarity? I mean please! It must be more than a simple pixel-wise metric, right?

In sense of science, phenomenal concepts are discernible and reducible. So, are these extraordinary events. i.e., extrasensory phenomena like intuition, explainable? Intuitions may be considered as perceptions of inexplicable modalities but that which cannot be explicitly observed.

Quite often some myths turn out to be facts on account of scientific truths brought forth. But how about that when something occurring yet cannot be accounted for by means of tools of scientific reasoning―turns into a myth? An astute scientific observer’s job is to investigate these given myths and turn them into observable phenomena (physicalize). Note that something which is incompatible with the truth of physicalism─ is a mystery, unless proved otherwise. Yet, there is nothing mystical or phenomenal in such sense about the experiences of the mind, or consciousness. Consciousness and mental states are not incompatible with the brain functioning. They co-exist, the one latter (brain) supporting the one former (mind). So, what is so mysterious about this coupling? And from where does these extrasensory phenomena arise? 

I just read some information about how the accent of foreign English speakers affects the perception of truth. Do you think genre or age would do the same? Do you think it is possible to see the same phenomenon with native speakers? What would be the features affecting such a perception?

PSU vision team (led by Yanxi Liu) held symmetry competitions since 2013. There is no public code for evaluation metrics to evaluation metrics (PR curves and Max F1 scores) to compare reflection symmetry detection methods in clear way. Plus the recent baseline ( Atadjanov2016) is not available online for further comparisons.

Eric Kandel (2006) has revealed that the consolidation of memory at the level of the nucleus is a bipolar process: chemical agents exist in our cells that can either potentiate or suppress memory. Having a double-ended system prevents extremes: remembering everything or remembering nothing. As a child we are rewarded for remembering everything we are taught in school under the assumption that all knowledge is good. But what happens if the knowledge is tainted such as that the black slaves on plantations enjoyed being supported by the white slave owners, that the Holocaust was a fabrication, that the recent election in the United States was rigged, that vaccines produce massive side-effects, that drinking Clorox is an effective way to kill Covid-19, and so on. It is instructive that Albert Einstein was not a great student (i.e., did not like to memorize things and he had difficulty in his second language, French, which he needed to complete his university entrance exams, Strauss 2016) yet his ability to zero-in on the important data while excluding nonsense is what made him an extraordinary scientist. Ergo, the management of one’s memory may be as important as having a good memory.

References

Kandel ER (2006) In Search of Memory. The Emergence of a New Science of Mind. W.W. Norton & Company Inc., New York.

Strauss V (2016) Was Albert Einstein really a bad student who failed math? The Washington Post, Feb.

We, humans, couldn't have abstracted the identity of indiscernibles and self-identity from our sense perception; the existence of space precludes the possibility of two objects (a,b) being identical--no two objects can possibly occupy the same space. On the other hand, the existence of time precludes the possibility of a single object (a) being identical with itself-- no object can maintain the same properties (mass, volume, color, the coordinates of its electrons orbiting the nuclei .etc...) over time. Still, we hold that a=a and a=b ,with certainty.

Where do we get this apparently a priori knowledge of identity then, if not from experience?

Yes, less reading, if students of Psychology simply require that ALL that they bother to read/read-about in this "discipline" should be that where behaviors are discussed clearly, and in clear terms OF BEHAVIOR PATTERNS -- and basically just THAT (such patternings) BEING [ substantially ] ALL. (History will show that the rest -- unless you are an advertiser, or maybe a "social psychologist" -- will go down the toilet.)

P.S. "Models" not integrally based-on and/or directly facilitating the seeing-of the ACTUAL BEHAVIOR PATTERNS DO "NOT COUNT". "Mechanisms" not integrally of a biological (and behavior patterned) nature DO "NOT COUNT". You may skip those.

In the field of safety, all the indicators tend to be the first mentioned lagging indicators. The question is always about how many accidents happened, how many thefts occurred or how many work hours were lost. Even most of the bonuses in safety management are tied to the goal of zero accidents.

Company turnover is a lagging metric, as well as an accident frequency rate. But in order to have an actual effect on the business operations, every company should concentrate on the leading indicators to predict and adjust the direction of the company and its safety measurements.

I need to download the metrics of the scopus from 2014 until 2018 because I need some informations about a journal in this period. I appreciate any help .thanks

A metric at the most has 10 degrees of freedom. How do you show the same from the metric in Newmann-Penrose formalism?