## 4 Results and Discussion
### Sensory Test for Glossiness and Translucency  
The sensory test results are shown in Figure 9 for both glossiness and translucency. The scattering coefficient shown in Figure 8 is obtained on the horizontal axis. The vertical axis is the value obtained by statistically processing the sensory test results for both glossiness and translucency using [PERSON]'s method, so that the mean value of the population evaluated becomes 0. The scale on the vertical axis indicates statistically that a difference of 1 means a difference of 1\(\sigma\), as shown in Figure 4. Specifically, when two samples with a difference of 1\(\sigma\) are compared, statistically, 84.1% of the respondents felt that the sample with the larger value was more glossy or translucent than the sample with the smaller value. First, chi-square statistic \(\chi^{2}\)[26] and degrees of freedom f were calculated to test the consistency of this sensory test, and both were found to be consistent at \(p<0.01\). In other words, as a result, the number of samples used was found to be sufficient to examine trends. The results for translucency showed that the lower the scattering coefficient, the more translucent samples tended to be when viewed as three groups with different scattering coefficients. As mentioned earlier, a comparison of the zinc oxide sample group with a small scattering coefficient (Nos. 6-10) and the high scattering coefficient group with different components (Nos. 11-12) showed a difference of approximately 2\(\sigma\), which is a sufficiently significant difference. The difference between the groups with the same titanium dioxide compositions (Nos. 1-5) and the groups with the same titanium dioxide compositions (Nos. 11-12) was more than 1\(\sigma\). This is a significant difference. On the other hand, when the results of the group of samples with Nos. 1-5 and Nos. 6-10 were compared, which were prepared at different stirring speeds, the difference falls in the range of 0.5\(\sigma\) to 1\(\sigma\). In other words, the results suggest that there were not enough differences to clearly determine all the differences. This does not mean that there were no differences. Furthermore, when comparing only the change in stirring speed as a small group of differences (within Nos. 1-5 or 6-10), most of the differences were within 0.5\(\sigma\), indicating that there were no differences that could be considered as being within 0.5\(\sigma\). In our previous study [27], the relationship between \"translucency\" and \"scattering coefficient\" was investigated by having three-dimensional (3D) images observed on a 3D display with glasses. Although there was a difference between viewing the experiment on the display and viewing the actual product samples, the results were consistent with this study: the translucency decreased as the scattering coefficient increased. Next, we discuss the glossiness in the same way. Comparisons between group Nos. 1-5 and Nos. 6-10, which showed differences in translucency, showed that there was only a difference within 0.5\(\sigma\), both between groups and within each group. In terms of glossiness,  
Figure 9: Results of sensory test for translucency and glossiness as a function of the scattering coefficient of the sample. there was no clear difference in the trend. In addition, a comparison between the group of samples with the largest difference in scattering coefficients (Nos. 11-12) and the other samples showed that the difference was only about 0.8\(\sigma\), even when the largest difference was obtained. In other words, although there is no clear and significant difference between the samples with the number Nos. 11-12 group and the others, it can be considered that the higher the scattering coefficient, the harder it is to feel the glossiness, but the difference is very small. Finally, we compared and analyzed gender differences in the perception of translucency and glossiness and show the results in Figure 10 for males and females, respectively.