LifeProject, Fernando - OPW Interview

OPW INTERVIEW -- July 26 -- LifeProject Method, created by Fernando Ardenghi, is an innovative and high precision quantitative method that allows us to meet people based on similar personalities. He plans to launch his own online dating site incorporating LPM. - Mark Brooks

What’s your background, Fernando?
At 37, I’m an Argentinean electronic engineer. In 1996, I started my doctoral thesis but didn’t complete it. Since 1997, I’ve been working in different Argentinean factories (including a Nuclear Power Plant). I’ve also been studying entrepreneurship since 2001.

What got you interested in the Internet dating business?
In 1997, I took the normative 16PF personality test when applying for a job. Could the knowledge I’d acquired from my failed doctoral thesis be useful for a business opportunity? Out of curiosity, I investigated methodologies and tests recruiters use to evaluate job candidates. The result of the normative 16PF personality test (expressed as a quantized pattern), plus an adapted quantum mechanics math equation, led me to invent a quantitative method to compare similarity between patterns that could be useful for dating purposes.

What research have you done that’s focused in the space?
I haven’t conducted my own research yet; I need a database of at least 100,000 people to take the 16PF5 test. Reading up on research conducted by renowned academics, I’ve yet to see any scientific paper (published by an online dating site that claims scientific matching or any related academic) showing how its ‘recipe’ really works, i.e. proving they can offer enduring, long term relationships (or marriage) with low divorce rates.

I noticed that the word ‘compatibility’ has many meanings for online dating sites, academics, researchers, and psychologists.

Sometimes the word compatibility means a high degree of similarity between several variables (religion, education, income, personality, likes and dislikes, etc.) of prospective mates; sometimes compatibility means a mix of similarity and complementarity between variables; sometimes when a dating site says compatibility or even chemistry, nobody really knows exactly what it means! Some online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods use the word similarity as: “a proprietary Dyadic Adjustment Scale”, others mean: “a proprietary multivariate linear regression equation”, some say a mix of similarity and complementarity meaning: “a proprietary multivariate logistic regression equation”, still others mix similarity and complementarity meaning: “a proprietary equation to calculate “compatibility” between prospective mates!”

Since 2003, I’ve been testing online dating sites who claim scientific matching by creating dummy M/F profiles and using them as test points for reverse engineering purposes. I discovered that proprietary tests or models used by those sites could have great precision in measuring different psychological variables, but the matching algorithm (they apply) has low precision when comparing one profile to others. The whole precision (measurement_of_variables + pattern_calculation) is less than anyone could achieve by searching on one’s own! I solved that problem and contacted many researchers/academics and online dating sites, with no success until now.

What is LifeProject Method?
LPM is the codename of an innovative and high precision quantitative method that compares similarity between quantized patterns, like:
The pattern 6.7.6.8.9.6.7.7.8.7.2.5.8.7.3.4 is 74,79865772% similar to the pattern 5.7.4.8.7.4.5.6.4.6.8.9.6.8.4.4
The pattern 6.7.6.8.9.6.7.7.8.7.2.5.8.7.3.4 is 92,55033557% similar to the pattern 7.7.6.8.8.7.6.5.8.7.4.5.7.7.3.4
The pattern 6.7.5.8.8.6.7.7.8.7.4.5.8.7.3.4 is 88,38926174% similar to the pattern 5.6.4.7.7.5.6.6.7.6.3.4.7.6.2.3
The pattern 6.7.5.8.8.6.7.7.8.7.4.5.8.7.3.4 is 87,58389262% similar to the pattern 7.8.6.9.9.7.8.8.9.8.5.6.9.8.4.5
LPM takes into account the score and the trend to score of any pattern.

In the above example, it used the results of the 16PF5 test, but it can use the results of other test, like the 30 subdomains of the “NEO PI-R” Big5.

• The ENSEMBLE (whole set of different valid possibilities) of the primary domains of the Big5 is 10E5 (quantized from 1 to 10) and 10E10 (by percentile)
• The ensemble of the primary domains of the Big7 used by WeAttract is 10E7 (quantized from 1 to 10)
• The ensemble of the 16PF5 is: 10E16, big number as All World Population is nearly 6.7 * 10E9
• The ensemble of the 30 subdomains of the Big5 (quantized from 1 to 10 and not by percentile) is a terrible very big number: 10E30

LPM doesn’t include sex, sexual orientation or religion. It only takes into account personality (measured by a normative test, like 16PF5 or the 30 subdomains of the “NEO PI-R” Big5 Big5).

In LPM, “compatibility” (between prospective mates) is a high percentage of “similarity” between personality patterns, perhaps over 90.00000000% ± 0.00000001%
LPM algorithm calculates “similarity” between personality patterns using the following adapted quantum mechanics math equation.
BRA <#X| means person #X’s 16PF5 Report
KET |#Y> means person #Y’s 16PF5 Report |CQ| means Comparison Operator
<#X|CQ|#Y> means the Comparison between client #X and client #Y
<#X|CQ|#Y> == K01 + K02 + K03 + K04 + K05 + K06 + K07 + K08 + K09 + K10 + K11 + K12 + K13 + K14 + K15 + K16
(A) Warmth; (B) Reasoning; (C) Emotional Stability; (E) Liveliness; (G) RuleConsciousness; (H) Social Boldness; (I) Sensitivity; (L) Vigilance; (M) Abstractedness; (N) Privateness (O) Apprehension; (Q1) Openness to Change; (Q2) SelfReliance; (Q3) Perfectionism; (Q4) Tension. 16 independent variables that take integer values from 1 to 10

How will it help dating sites?
LPM is a new way to meet people based on similar personalities. I chose the normative 16PF5 test available in different languages, because no other dating site uses it. In August 2005, Dr. John A. Johnson told me, “There are probably undiscovered factors beyond similarity of any type that determine relationship quality.” I think LifeProject deserves an opportunity to prove it can contribute to long-term relationships with low divorce rates. If not, many people would be interested in meeting/contacting others sharing nearly the same personality.

What does it cost for online daters?
The annual fee for end users is expected to cost USD300 for the first year, with a yearly re-subscription of $30. Fortunately the US, Canadian, European and Latin American markets remain enormous. The “unexploited” Latin American market is now over $100 million.

There are currently no sites with the vision to see the potential for this type of matching method. The inevitable next step is for me to bring it to market myself.

Comments

[James Houran]

Hi Mark,

It's good to see an interview regarding testing applications. After all, testing for online dating sites isn't really declining from what I've seen.

That said, I found the explanations in this interview incomplete. I'm pretty educated and definitely in tune with compatibility literature and equations, yet I couldn't follow Fernando's train of thought on his quantitiative explanations. And if I'm lost, I can imagine virtually all of your readers are too.

The best way to assess Fernando's proposed system is for him to provide a detailed example using say three variables (keep it simple!). This example should show EACH AND EVERY STEP in what Fernando is doing to make his calculations. Without that, I don't think anyone can understand what is new, different or better in his approach than what's already available.

Thanks,

James Houran, Ph.D.
OnlineDatingMagazine

[Ryan]

The issue here is that people don't date each other on similar personalities. According to Dr Babe Livewilder at jivelo.com , there are much deeper issues at work when a person is attracted to another person. The obvious ones are physical, income and don't forget the 6 second subconscious filter. It takes a few seconds for a person to make a first impression so no matter how accurate a method is in matching people online, if there is no initial chemistry, it's a no starter.

[Fernando Ardenghi]

Hi all:

At the interview, there was a typo mistake in the equation!
it is

(#X|CQ|#Y) == K01(AX|CQ|AY) + K02(BX|CQ|BY) + K03(CX|CQ|CY) + K04(EX|CQ|EY) + K05(FX|CQ|FY) + K06(GX|CQ|GY) + K07(HX|CQ|HY) + K08(IX|CQ|IY) + K09(LX|CQ|LY) + K10(MX|CQ|MY) + K11(NX|CQ|NY) + K12(OX|CQ|OY) + K13(Q1X|CQ|Q1Y) + K14(Q2X|CQ|Q2Y) + K15(Q3X|CQ|Q3Y) + K16(Q4X|CQ|Q4Y)

(A) Warmth; (B) Reasoning; (C) Emotional Stability; (E) Dominance, (F) Liveliness; (G) RuleConsciousness; (H) Social Boldness; (I) Sensitivity; (L) Vigilance; (M) Abstractedness; (N) Privateness (O) Apprehension; (Q1) Openness to Change; (Q2) SelfReliance; (Q3) Perfectionism; (Q4) Tension. 16 independent variables that take integer values from 1 to 10

and

not
(#X|CQ|#Y) == K01 + K02 + K03 + K04 + K05 + K06 + K07 + K08 + K09 + K10 + K11 + K12 + K13 + K14 + K15 + K16
as (wrongly) published.

Also at the interview
74,79865772% and 74.79865772% means the same.

Real examples at
http://mb.internetdatingconference.com/scientific-papers-t395.html

"what is new, different or better in his approach than what's already available."
- LifeProject Method is an innovative and high precision quantitative method to assess similarity between quantized patterns.
To my best knowledge, I haven’t seen any other quantitative method with higher precision than the one I had invented.
- No actual online dating site is using the normative (available in different languages) 16PF5 test as main personality test.

Regards,
Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
[email protected]

[James Houran]

Hi Fernando and List,

Thanks for the additional information and corrections, but it doesn't clarify anything really. The method I see here is simply adding up scores -- the actual LPM seems to be a black box and therefore I can't assess it.

That said, I do disagree with some of the additional comments from Fernando:

1. "The LPM has high precision:" I appreciate Fernando's quantitative approach, but I'm extremely skeptical of the claim that it has high precision. The measurement error alone in the 16PF5 test would preclude its precision being greater than other questionnaire methods.

2. "No other site is using the normative 16PF5 test." Elements of the "traits" in the 16PF can be seen in many other personality matching tests. However, the 16PF5 is a proprietary test, so any service using it will be paying large licensing fees. Perhaps more to the point, assessing similarity in personality is not critical. Literature reviews show that couples have little to no similarity with respect to personality. Thus, any matching method based solely or mainly on personality traits seems a bit misguided prima facie.

Thanks,

James Houran, Ph.D.
OnlineDatingMagazine.com

[Fernando Ardenghi]

Hi again Dr. Houran!!!

The 16PF5 licensing fee is USD100K - USD150K per year with unlimited use.
It is not quite expensive for a big online dating site.

You had wrote "The method I see here is simply adding up scores"
That is wrong!
It is adding up partial probabilities, because the output of the 16PF5 test resembles a set of 16 distinguishable particles in a one_dimensional box.

Eg:
For person #X:: A:6.B:7.C:6.E:8.F:9.G:6.H:7.I:7.L:8.M:7.N:2.O:5.Q1:8.Q2:7.Q3:3.Q4:4
16 distinguishable particles in a one_dimensional box of length L and infinite outside the box with 10 quantized levels of energy (named box X)
distinguishable particle (A) Warmth at level "6"
distinguishable particle (B) Reasoning at level "7"
distinguishable particle (C) Emotional Stability at level "6"
distinguishable particle (E) Dominance at level "8"
distinguishable particle (F) Liveliness at level "9"
distinguishable particle (G) RuleConsciousness at level "6"
distinguishable particle (H) Social Boldness at level "7"
distinguishable particle (I) Sensitivity at level "7"
distinguishable particle (L) Vigilance at level "8"
distinguishable particle (M) Abstractedness at level "7"
distinguishable particle (N) Privateness at level "2"
distinguishable particle (O) Apprehension to Change at level "5"
distinguishable particle (Q1) Openness at level "8"
distinguishable particle (Q2) SelfReliance at level "7"
distinguishable particle (Q3) Perfectionism at level "3"
distinguishable particle (Q4) Tension at level "4"

And

For person #Y:: A:5.B:7.C:4.E:8.F:7.G:4.H:5.I:6.L:4.M:6.N:8.O:9.Q1:6.Q2:8.Q3:4.Q4:4
16 distinguishable particles in other one_dimensional box of length L and infinite outside the box with 10 quantized levels of energy (named box Y)
distinguishable particle (A) Warmth at level "5"
distinguishable particle (B) Reasoning at level "7"
distinguishable particle (C) Emotional Stability at level "4"
distinguishable particle (E) Dominance at level "8"
distinguishable particle (F) Liveliness at level "7"
distinguishable particle (G) RuleConsciousness at level "4"
distinguishable particle (H) Social Boldness at level "5"
distinguishable particle (I) Sensitivity at level "6"
distinguishable particle (L) Vigilance at level "4"
distinguishable particle (M) Abstractedness at level "6"
distinguishable particle (N) Privateness at level "8"
distinguishable particle (O) Apprehension to Change at level "9"
distinguishable particle (Q1) Openness at level "6"
distinguishable particle (Q2) SelfReliance at level "8"
distinguishable particle (Q3) Perfectionism at level "4"
distinguishable particle (Q4) Tension at level "4"

Each quantized level is associated with a probability density function.

(#X|CQ|#Y) is the sum of the comparisons between different states, the sum of partial probabilities.
(#X|CQ|#Y) == 74.79865772%
Read as the pattern 6.7.6.8.9.6.7.7.8.7.2.5.8.7.3.4 is 74.79865772% similar to the pattern 5.7.4.8.7.4.5.6.4.6.8.9.6.8.4.4
More at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_in_a_box

ABOUT PRECISION

High precision means similarity between quantized patterns expressed as a number with 8 decimals, like 92.55033557%

Other sites use a number like 110 (Cybersuitors), 96% (PlentyofFish Chemistry Predictor), 65 (Parship), etc.
and others use only a graphic system, like a set of up to five empty/half_full/full hearts icon; a set of up to ten empty/half_full/full squares, a set of semaphores, etc.
to indicate the degree of "compatibility"

ABOUT SIMILARITY

Last February 2005, using a couple-centered approach, Drs. Klohnen and Luo wrote in a paper "People may be attracted to those who have similar attitudes, values, and beliefs and even marry them (at least in part) on the basis of this similarity. However, once individuals are in a committed relationship, it may be primarily personality similarity that influences marital happiness. This suggests that attitude and value similarity may play a different role in relationship development than personality similarity does. For example, whereas similarity in attitudes and values appears to be important early on in the relationship and may play an important role in relationship progression, personality similarity becomes more important as the relationship reaches greater commitment.
...........
future research designed to better understand these underlying processes is needed."

In August 2005, Dr. John A. Johnson told me, "There are probably undiscovered factors beyond similarity of any type that determine relationship quality."

The paper "METHODOLOGICAL AND DATA ANALYTIC ADVANCES IN THE STUDY OF INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS: INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL ISSUE"

At page 413 says: ".... It is also important for investigators to challenge statisticians to create new analytic techniques when existing ones are inadequate. These tasks are left to you, the reader."

That is because I had invented a new method to assess similarity.

I think you are definitely the Researcher the Online Dating Industry needs, because there is no other Psychologist with your knowledge and experience.
You had an opportunity when you were one of the brains behind the True Compatibility Test and I suspect you also were one of the brains behind the PlentyofFish Chemistry Predictor.

I hope I can successfully launch LPM (partnering with a major online dating site or by my own) and hire your services in order to check if LPM matches persons who will have more stable and satisfying relationships than couples matched by chance or other typical type of compatibility test (like the Wilson Relationship Compatibility Indicator WRCI test).

If not, anyway, I think lot of persons could be interested in meeting/contacting other persons sharing nearly the same personality because they will be *predictable* for them.

Regards,

Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
[email protected]