The Analysis of Facial Beauty: An Emerging Area of Research in Pattern Analysis

  • Andrea Bottino
  • Aldo Laurentini
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6111)

Abstract

Much research presented recently supports the idea that the human perception of attractiveness is data-driven and largely irrespective of the perceiver. This suggests using pattern analysis techniques for beauty analysis. Several scientific papers on this subject are appearing in image processing, computer vision and pattern analysis contexts, or use techniques of these areas. In this paper, we will survey the recent studies on automatic analysis of facial beauty, and discuss research lines and practical applications.

Keywords

Face image analysis facial landmarks attractiveness 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhao, W., Chellappa, R., Philips, P.J., Rosenfeld, A.: Face Recognition, a literature survey. ACM Computing Surveys 35(4), 399–458 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pantic, M., Rothkrantz, L.J.M.: Toward an affect-sensitive multimodal human-computer interaction. IEEE Proc. 91(9) (September 2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fasel, B., Luettin, J.: Automatic facial expression analysis: a survey. Pattern Recognition 36, 259–275 (2003)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ekman, P.: Facial Expressions. In: Handbook of Cognition and Emotion. John Wiley&Sons, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Adamson, P., Doud Galli, S.: Modern concepts of beauty. Current Opinion in Otolaryngology& Head and Neck Surgery 11, 295–300 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bashour, M.: History and Current Concepts in the Analysis of Facial Attractiveness. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 118(3), 741–756 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grammer, K., Thornhill, R.: Human(Homo hsapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: the role of symmetry and averageness. J. Comparative Psychology 108, 233–242 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Perret, D., May, K., Yoshikawa, S.: Facial shape and judgement of female attractiveness. Nature 368, 239–242 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cunningham, M.R., Roberts, A.R., Barbee, A.P., Wu, C.H., Druen, P.B.: Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours: consistency and variability in the crosscultural perception of female physical attractiveness. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 68, 261–279 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thakera, J.N., Iwawaki, S.: Cross-cultural comparisons in interpersonal attraction of females towards males. Journal of Social Psychology 108, 121–122 (1979)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Knight, H., Keith, O.: Ranking facial attractiveness. Europ. J. of Othodonthics 27, 340–348 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Langlois, J.H., Roggman, L.A.: Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science 1, 115–121 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Swaddle, J.P., Cuthill, I.C.: Asymmetry and human facial attractiveness: simmery may not always be beautiful. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 261, 111–116 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leyvand, T., Cohen-Or, D., Dror, G., Lischinski, D.: Data-driven enhancement of facial attractiveness. ACM Trans. Graph. 27(3), 1–9 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aarabi, P., Hughes, D., Mohajer, K., Emami, M.: The automatic measurement of facial beauty. In: IEEE Proc. Int. Conf. on Systems, Man and Cyb., pp. 2168–2174 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gunes, H., Piccardi, M., Jan, T.: Comparative beauty classification for pre-surgery planning. In: IEEE Proc. Int. Conf. On Systems, Man and Cyb., vol. 4, pp. 2644–2647 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gunes, H., Piccardi, M., Jan, T.: Automated classification of female facial beauty by image analysis and supervised learning. In: Proc. of SPIE Symposium on Electronic Imaging 2004, Conference on Visual Communications and Image Processing, San Jose, California, USA, January 18-22, vol. 5308, Part 2, pp. 968–978 (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gunes, H., Piccardi, M.: Assessing facial beauty through proportion analysis by image processing and supervised learning. Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 64, 1184–1199 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    O’Toole, A.J., Price, T., Vetter, T., Bartlett, J.C., Blanz, V.: 3D shape and 2D surface textures of human faces: the role of “averages” in attractiveness and age. Image and Vision Computing 18, 9–19 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kagian, A., Dror, G., Leyvand, T., Cohen-Or, D., Ruppin, E.: A humanlike predictor of facial attractiveness. Adv. Neural Info. Proc. Syst. 19, 674–683 (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Eisenthal, Y., Dror, G., Ruppin, E.: Facial Attractiveness: beauty and the machine. Neural Computaation 18, 119–142 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schmid, K., Marx, D., Samal, A.: Computation of face attractiveness index based on neoclassic canons, symmetry and golden ratio. Pattern Recognition 41, 2710–2717 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Winston, J.S., O’Doherty, J., Kilner, J.M., Perret, D.I., Dolan, R.J.: Brain Systems for assessing facial attractiveness. Neuropsychologia 45, 195–206 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fink, B., Grammar, K., Matts, P.: Visible skin color distribution plays a role in the perception of age, attractiveness, and health in female faces. Evolution of Human Behaviour 27, 433–442 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jones, B., Little, A., Burt, D., Perret, D.: When facial attractiveness is only skin deep. Perception 33, 569–576 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Darwin, C.: The descent of men and selection in relation to sex. John Murray, London (1871)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fink, B., Grammer, K., Thornhil, R.: Human (Homo Sapiens) facial attractiveness in relation to skin texture and color. J. of Comparative Psychology 115, 92–99 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Langlois, J., Roggman, L., Casey, R., Ritter, J., Rieser-Danner, L., Jenkins, V.: Infant preference for attractive faces: rudiment of a stereotype? Dev. Psych. 23, 363–369 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ozkul, T., Ozkul, M.H.: Computer simulation tool for rhinoplasty planning. Comput. in Biol. and Med. 34, 697–718 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lee, T., Sun, Y., Lin, Y., Lin, L., Lee, C.: Three-dimensional facial model reconstruction and plastic surgery simulation. IEEE Trans. on Info. Tech. in Biomed. 3(3), 214–220 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jefferson, Y.: Facial Beauty: establishing a universal standard. Int. J. Orthod. 15, 9–22 (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ricketts, R.M.: Divine proportions in facial aesthetics. Clin. Plast. Surg. 9, 401–422 (1982)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Holland, E.: Marquardt’s Phi Mask: pitfalls of relying on fashion models and the golden ratio to describe a beautiful face. Aesth. Plast. Surg. 32, 200–208 (2008)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Baker, B.W., Woods, M.G.: The role of the divine proportions in the esthetic improvement of patients undergoing combined orthodontic/orthognathic surgical treatment. Int. J. Adult. Orthod. Orthognath. Surg. 16, 108–120 (2001)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rankin, et al.: Quality-of-life outcomes after cosmetic surgery. Discussion. Plast. and Reconstr. Surg. 12, 2139–2147 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Barash, D.P.: Sociobiology and behaviour. Elsevier North Holland, New York (1982)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hausfater, G., Tornhill, R. (eds.): Parasites and sexual selection. American Zoologist (special issue) 30 (1990)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bottino, A., Laurentini, A., Rosano, L.: A New Computer-aided Technique for Planning the aesthetic Outcome of Plastic Surgery. In: Proc. WSCG 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dion, K., Bertscheid, E.: Physical attractiveness and perception among children. Sociometry 37, 1–12 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Galton, F.: Composite portraits, made by combining those of different persons in a single resultant figure. J. of the Anthropological Inst. 8, 132–144 (1879)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Weeden, J., Sabini, J.: Subjective and objective measures of attractiveness and their relation to sexual behavior and sexual attitudes in university students. Arch. Sex Behav. 36, 79–88 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Whithehill, J., Movellan, J.: Personalized facial attractiveness prediction. IEEE Proc. 8th Int. Conf. Aut. Face &Gesture Reco., 1–7 (September 17-19, 2008)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Whithehill, J., Littlewort, G., Fasel, I., Bartlett, M., Movellan, J.: Developing a pratical smile detector. IEEE Trans. PAMI (2007) (submitted)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    White, R., Eden, A., Maire, M.: Automatic prediction of human attractiveness.UC Berkeley CS280A Project (2004)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Davis, B.C., Lazebnik, S.: Analysis of human attractiveness using manifold kernel regression. In: IEEE Proc. ICIP 2008, pp. 109–112 (2008)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Joy, K., Primeaux, D.: A comparison of two contributive analysis methods applied to an ANN modelling facial attractiveness. In: IEEE Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Soft. Eng. Res. Manag. and Appl. (2006)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mitsuda, T., Yoshida, R.: Application of near-infrared spectroscopy to measuring of attractiveness of opposite-sex faces. In: Proc. IEEE 27th Conf. Engineering in Medicine and Biology, Shangai, China, September 1-4, pp. 5900–5903 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Bottino
    • 1
  • Aldo Laurentini
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Automatica e InformaticaPolitecnico di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations