LIFEPROJECT METHOD

My name is Fernando Ardenghi and I am a 41 years old Argentinean electronic engineer with several post graduated courses. I have invented a new on line dating / social networking method named LIFEPROJECT (startup, ready to launch).
http://www.onlinepersonalswatch.com/news/2008/07/lifeproject-met.html

Scientific research that could substantiate the method at: http://onlinedatingsoundbarrier.blogspot.com/2011/05/top-papers-for-online-dating-industry.html

Papers showing the newest & freshest Research in Theories of Romantic Relationships Development clearly show: compatibility is all about a high level on personality similarity between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.

I plan to acquire the license of the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of daters, or hire a Psychologist to develop a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5, to construct a copycat version of the 16PF5 (one per language and norm), but improving it using Item Response Theory / Rasch Scaling (the Gold Standard for Modern Test Theory) with different questionnaires for men and women and all the questions rearranged in a Rasch hierarchy. It will be used as the personality test for a new dating site intended for serious daters, offering solely strict personality* similarity*.

*personality: measured with the 16PF5 or similar normative test.
*similarity: calculated using the high precision quantized pattern comparison method I had invented, named LIFEPROJECT method (part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation).

Daters: men and women, normal_persons* over 26 years old. 
*normal_persons: persons with 23 pairs of chromosomes and any psycho-patologies.

Men should take the test at least 3 times and also synchronize with biorhythms (for future Research purposes).
Women not taking contraceptive pills should take the test at least 3 times:  7 days before, in their real periods and 7 days after, and also synchronize with biorhythms (for future Research purposes).
Women  taking contraceptive pills should take the test at least 3 times:  7 days before, in their false periods and 7 days after, and also synchronize with biorhythms (for future Research purposes).

Both men and women should say if they are under other hormonal treatment. For each persons "internal compatibility" will be calculated between #1_try and #2_try, and between #2_try and #3_try. If "internal compatibility" between #2_try and #3_try is equal or slightly higher than "internal compatibility" between #1_try and #2_try, then #3_try is the one to be added to database.

I think lots of persons could be interested in meeting/contacting other persons sharing nearly the same personality because they will be *predictable* for them.

Fernando Ardenghi (41 - electronic engineer) started his career studying and working at Instituto Balseiro and Centro Atómico Bariloche, Argentina (1996-1997). Afterwards, he worked at a textile factory during 1997, an electromechanical factory (Siemens partner 1998-1999), Central Nuclear Atucha 1 (Siemens Nuclear Power Plant 1999-2001) and Centro Atómico Ezeiza; and other different Argentinean factories.

Fernando has over 15 years experience in Information Technology. As he worked in different jobs in few years, he gained valuable experience in psychological topics like methodology and tests that are applied to evaluate candidates for a job. This knowledge, and the one he acquired at Instituto Balseiro, allowed him to develop an innovative method for Online Dating / Social Networking and Business Intelligence.

Fernando has also entrepreneurial studies at Universidad de San Andrés, Universidad de Buenos Aires and Universidad del CEMA.

Since the beginning of 2003, I had been testing online dating sites -intended for serious daters- by creating dummy (fake) Male/Female profiles and using them as test points for reverse engineering purposes.

Any dater can easily apply some reverse engineering methods over  Match,  PerfectMatch, eHarmony, Chemistry, Parship, Meetic, Be2 and others. It is quite easy although a bit time consuming and boring. You need to create at least 24 dummy (fake) profiles, 12 for Male and 12 for Female, each profile slightly different for the rest, as test points.

Match: If you check Match or any other site performing as a Powerful Searching Engine, you will see [on average] a person (mostly men) will strongly like 3 or 4 prospective mates per 100 (one hundred) members or 30 to 40 prospective mates per 1,000 (one thousand) members screened, then that person will send messages to them an only [on average] 10% will strongly like (mostly women) and reply to the person who initiated the contact.
Searching on one's own is in the range [on average] of 3 or 4 prospective mates who search and select to each other per 1,000 members screened.

PerfectMatch: If you check PerfectMatch or any other site performing mostly as Matching based on Self-Reported Data / Bidirectional Recommendation Engine (personal preferences, likes and dislikes, ipsative personality tests: MBTI, DISC) you will see [on average] a member receives 3 or 4 prospective mates as recommended for dating purposes per 1,000 (one thousand) members screened in exactly the same range of searching on one's own.

eHarmony/eDarling: If you check eHarmony/eDarling or any other site like Chemistry, Parship, Be2, Meetic, etc performing mostly as a Compatibility Matching Algorithm (those sites are mostly using different versions of the Big5 normative personality test as its core) and you will see [on average] a member receives 3 or 4 prospective matches as highly compatible for dating purposes per 1,000 (one thousand) members screened in exactly the same range of searching on one's own and mutual filtering methods.

If you carefully complete all that homework, You will re-discover what I had discovered some years ago, "the online dating sound barrier" for Compatibility Matching Algorithms.

Breaking "the online dating sound barrier" is to achieve far better precision than searching on one's own or mutual filtering.

Actual Online Dating sites are fully intoxicated with different versions of the FFI five factor inventory / Big5 or other proprietary models instead (like Chemistry or PerfectMatch), to measure personality traits, and all of those tests are more simplified versions than the 16PF5 normative personality test.

Breaking "the online dating sound barrier" is to achieve at least:
3 most compatible persons in a 100,000 persons database.
12 most compatible persons in a 1,000,000 persons database.
48 most compatible persons in a 10,000,000 persons database.
100 times better than Compatibility Matching Algorithms used by actual online dating sites!

The only way to achieve that is:
- using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5. The ensemble of the 16PF5 is: 10E16, big number as All World Population is nearly 6.7 * 10E9 
(WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites, but no one is using the 16PF5)

- expressing compatibility with eight decimals, like The pattern 6.7.6.8.9.6.7.7.8.7.2.5.8.7.3.4 is 92.55033557%  +/- 0.00000001% similar to the pattern 7.7.6.8.8.7.6.5.8.7.4.5.7.7.3.4
Using a quantized pattern comparison method (part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation) to calculate similarity between prospective mates.

That is the only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry.

All other proposals are .............. NOISE

what is new, different or better in this approach than what's already available? innovative on line dating / social networking method by personality.  Personality matching method with 16PF5 test available in different languages. This 16PF5 test is not in use by any competitor. International proposal, could be launched in 5 or more countries at the same time. It is a personality profiling online dating / social networking site. A post crisis profitable dotcom company. I had failed several times to launch it since 2001.  

Actual Online Dating Sites (eHarmony/eDarling, True, Chemistry, PerfectMatch, Meetic, Be2, Parship, PlentyOfFish, OkCupid, etc) : lack of precision / low precision / low successful matching rates

The annual fee for end users is expected to cost USD300 for the first year, with a yearly re-subscription of USD30. Fortunately the US, Canadian, European and Latin American markets remain enormous. The "unexploited" Latin American market is now over USD100 million. The price is the average of competitors, but price is not related to costs, because these clients need a price which will work as a barrier to avoid others play with their feelings. Direct cost is USD 22, selling cost is USD 62, salaries are USD 31, expected margin is USD 185 (160%) because this market is like selling coke, icecreams and pop corns in cinemas, cost are not related to selling price. Selling price should be a barrier to avoid non desirable persons.

Actual online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods are only fueled by big marketing budgets and not by serious scientific evidence.

No one (eHarmony, eDarling, Chemistry, PerfectMatch, PlentyOfFish Chemistry Predictor, Be2, Parship, Meetic and others) can prove its matching algorithm can match prospective partners who will have more stable and satisfying relationships than couples matched by chance, astrological destiny, personal preferences, searching on one's own, or other technique as the control group in a peer_reviewed Scientific Paper. They are all like placebo, because
* Actual online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods, when calculating compatibility between prospective mates, have less or at least the same precision as searching on one's own. [in the range of 3 or 4 persons compatible per 1,000 persons screened]
* That is because they use:
a) simplified versions of personality traits, instead of the 16PF5 or similar with the complete inventory (16 variables)
b) inadequate quantitative methods to calculate compatibility between prospective mates, like eHarmony which uses Dyadic Adjustment Scale or other sites which use multivariate linear / logistic regression equations o other equations.

To solve that problem I propose:
*) the 16PF5 or similar normative personality test to measure personality of normal persons over 26 years old interested in serious dating.
No actual online dating site offering compatibility matching methods uses the 16PF5 normative test available in different languages.

*) a new quantitative method to calculate compatibility between prospective mates, based on quantized pattern comparison (part of pattern recognition by correlation) named LIFEPROJECT method.
The value of my algorithm is to achieve far more precision than searching on one's own [in the range of 3 persons compatible per 100,000 persons screened, 100 times better than actual competitors]
and
try to prove if only high level on  personality*  similarity* between mates is the core of relationship stability and satisfaction for normal persons over 26 years old interested in serious dating.
*personality: measured with the 16PF5 normative test in different languages.
*similarity: calculated using the method I had invented, LIFEPROJECT method.