How a Simple Formula Might Explain Human Attraction
Forget fate or chance encounters—the secret to finding a partner might lie in a geometric model our brains use to calculate the perfect match.
For centuries, poets and philosophers have attempted to decipher the mysterious forces that draw two people together. Now, scientists are proposing a surprising new metaphor for this ancient dance: that human mate choice operates like a sophisticated computer algorithm. Groundbreaking research involving thousands of people across dozens of countries suggests we might all be running complex calculations in our heads when we evaluate potential partners. This isn't about cold, unfeeling mathematics, but about understanding the fundamental computational design our brains use to find love 1 .
Imagine walking into a room full of potential partners. Your mind is flooded with impressions—this person is kind, that one is intelligent, another is physically attractive and financially secure. But no one is perfect. How does your brain weigh these competing qualities to decide who is "right" for you? This is what scientists call the "mate preference integration problem" 1 .
How our minds combine multiple traits into a single attraction judgment
Navigating strengths and weaknesses across different dimensions
Humans express preferences across numerous dimensions when seeking a partner. Globally, people consistently value traits like intelligence, health, kindness, physical attractiveness, and financial prospects 1 2 . But in the real world, we constantly encounter people who represent a mix of strengths and weaknesses across these different areas. Our mental software must therefore integrate this fragmented information into a single, workable estimate of someone's overall value as a mate.
Researchers have proposed that our minds might solve this problem using a Euclidean model of preference integration. Think of it this way: you have an "ideal partner" living in your imagination, represented as a specific point in a multidimensional psychological space. Each dimension (or axis) represents one of your core preferences—one for kindness, another for intelligence, and so on 1 .
Every person you meet can also be mapped as a point in this space. According to the Euclidean model, your attraction to someone is inversely proportional to the geometric distance between your ideal point and their actual position in this preference space 1 . The shorter the distance, the better the match, and the stronger the pull you feel. This elegant mental shortcut allows us to navigate the complex trade-offs inherent in partner selection.
Adjust the sliders to see how different trait combinations affect the "distance" to your ideal partner:
Distance to Ideal Partner: 0.00
Attraction Level: High
The Euclidean distance formula calculates how closely a potential partner matches your ideal across multiple dimensions:
d = √[(x₁ - x₂)² + (y₁ - y₂)² + ...]
Where (x₁, y₁, ...) represents your ideal partner and (x₂, y₂, ...) represents the actual person.
The Euclidean hypothesis is compelling, but is it universally true? Or is it a cultural artifact limited to Western societies? To find out, an international team of researchers embarked on an ambitious large-scale study involving 14,487 participants from 45 countries across all inhabited continents 1 . This massive cross-cultural sample allowed them to test whether the Euclidean model truly reflects a universal aspect of human mating psychology.
Study conducted across 45 countries worldwide
The researchers combined real-world human data with sophisticated agent-based computer models. Here's how they built their simulated world:
The study focused on five fundamental mate preferences that previous research has shown to be universally important: kindness, intelligence, health, physical attractiveness, and financial prospects 1 .
Each "agent" (simulated person) in the model was assigned both a set of personal traits (how they actually scored on the five dimensions) and a set of ideal preferences (what they looked for in a partner) 1 .
The team programmed different models of how attraction might be calculated, pitting the Euclidean model against seven alternatives, including linear combination models and aspiration threshold models 1 .
Agents computed attraction to potential partners based on the assigned model, paired up, and produced "offspring" who inherited traits and preferences, allowing researchers to observe how different mate choice algorithms shaped populations over simulated generations 1 .
When the virtual models were compared against the massive dataset of real human relationships, a clear pattern emerged: the Euclidean model consistently provided the best fit for how people actually choose partners across diverse cultures worldwide 1 .
The research uncovered several key patterns that characterize human mate choice. The table below summarizes the core findings from both the agent-based models and the cross-cultural human data 1 :
| Finding | Description | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Strong Preference Fulfillment | People tend to choose partners who closely match their ideal preferences in Euclidean terms. | Suggests we're surprisingly effective at finding partners who match our internal checklist. |
| The Mate Value Advantage | Individuals higher in mate value (those who better embody what others want) experience greater "power of choice." | Demonstrates that mating markets operate with a certain logical consistency across cultures. |
| Higher Standards | Those with higher mate value set more demanding ideal standards for potential partners. | Explains why highly desirable people can afford to be more selective. |
| Assortative Mating | Higher mate value individuals consistently pair with other high mate value partners. | Confirms a universal pattern of "like-attracts-like" in long-term partnering. |
The research demonstrated that mate value operates similarly to a social currency. People who possess more of what others desire—whether through kindness, intelligence, or attractiveness—can effectively "spend" this currency to secure partners who better match their ideals 1 .
Participants in the global study
Countries across all inhabited continents
Core traits evaluated in mate selection
While the Euclidean model provides a powerful framework for understanding attraction, contemporary life introduces complications our ancestors never faced. Modern dating platforms, with their endless scroll of potential partners, can trigger choice overload—a psychological phenomenon where too many options make decision-making difficult 4 .
Psychologists have found that while having some choice is beneficial, an overabundance can be counterproductive. In one classic consumer study, shoppers were more likely to purchase jam when presented with 6 options (30% made a purchase) than when faced with 24 options (only 3% purchased) 4 .
This phenomenon directly translates to modern dating. One study found that mate choice plurality (having many options) has contradictory effects. While more options initially make it less likely someone will be single, beyond a certain point, choice overload sets in, actually increasing the likelihood of staying single because people become overwhelmed and unable to decide 4 .
The following table contrasts the effects of limited versus excessive mate choices in contemporary contexts:
| Scenario | Potential Benefits | Potential Drawbacks |
|---|---|---|
| Limited Mate Choices | Faster decision-making, greater satisfaction with available options, reduced comparison anxiety. | Higher likelihood of settling for a suboptimal match, fewer opportunities to find a highly compatible partner. |
| Excessive Mate Choices (e.g., dating apps) | Greater apparent opportunity to find a "perfect" match, exposure to diverse potential partners. | Choice overload leading to decision paralysis, lower satisfaction with chosen partner, constant fear of missing out. |
So what tools do researchers use to decode the architecture of human attraction? The field employs a diverse methodological toolkit that blends psychology, computer science, and evolutionary biology.
Computer simulations that create artificial societies of agents who interact according to specified rules. Researchers use them to test how different mating algorithms play out over generations 1 .
A geometric formula used to compute the "distance" between a person's ideal partner preferences and a potential mate's actual traits 1 .
Research conducted across diverse societies to distinguish human universals from culturally specific patterns, crucial for testing evolutionary hypotheses 1 .
Statistical approaches that model how the brain might accumulate "evidence" about a potential mate's quality over time before making a decision 7 .
The research into computational models of mate choice doesn't reduce romance to cold calculation. Rather, it gives us a powerful new metaphor for understanding the invisible architecture of attraction. The Euclidean model suggests our brains are built to perform sophisticated, multidimensional computations that help us navigate one of life's most important decisions.
This framework helps explain universal patterns in human mating—why we're attracted to certain people, why "assortative mating" occurs so consistently, and why modern dating environments sometimes lead to dissatisfaction. The next time you feel that spark of connection with someone, remember: your brain might have just calculated the shortest distance to your ideal partner.
This article is based on the study "Contrasting Computational Models of Mate Preference Integration Across 45 Countries" published in Scientific Reports and other scientific sources.