Literature DB >> 18401273

Evolving attractive faces using morphing technology and a genetic algorithm: a new approach to determining ideal facial aesthetics.

Brian J F Wong1, Koohyar Karimi, Zlatko Devcic, Christine E McLaren, Wen-Pin Chen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to: 1) determine if a genetic algorithm in combination with morphing software can be used to evolve more attractive faces; and 2) evaluate whether this approach can be used as a tool to define or identify the attributes of the ideal attractive face. STUDY
DESIGN: Basic research study incorporating focus group evaluations.
METHODS: Digital images were acquired of 250 female volunteers (18-25 y). Randomly selected images were used to produce a parent generation (P) of 30 synthetic faces using morphing software. Then, a focus group of 17 trained volunteers (18-25 y) scored each face on an attractiveness scale ranging from 1 (unattractive) to 10 (attractive). A genetic algorithm was used to select 30 new pairs from the parent generation, and these were morphed using software to produce a new first generation (F1) of faces. The F1 faces were scored by the focus group, and the process was repeated for a total of four iterations of the algorithm. The algorithm mimics natural selection by using the attractiveness score as the selection pressure; the more attractive faces are more likely to morph. All five generations (P-F4) were then scored by three focus groups: a) surgeons (n = 12), b) cos-metology students (n = 44), and c) undergraduate students (n = 44). Morphometric measurements were made of 33 specific features on each of the 150 synthetic faces, and correlated with attractiveness scores using univariate and multivariate analysis.
RESULTS: The average facial attractiveness scores increased with each generation and were 3.66 (+0.60), 4.59 (+/-0.73), 5.50 (+/-0.62), 6.23 (+/-0.31), and 6.39 (+/-0.24) for P and F1-F4 generations, respectively. Histograms of attractiveness score distributions show a significant shift in the skew of each curve toward more attractive faces with each generation. Univariate analysis identified nasal width, eyebrow arch height, and lip thickness as being significantly correlated with attractiveness scores. Multivariate analysis identified a similar collection of morphometric measures. No correlation with more commonly accepted measures such as the length facial thirds or fifths were identified. When images are examined as a montage (by generation), clear distinct trends are identified: oval shaped faces, distinct arched eyebrows, and full lips predominate. Faces evolve to approximate the guidelines suggested by classical canons. F3 and F4 generation faces look profoundly similar. The statistical and qualitative analysis indicates that the algorithm and methodology succeeds in generating successively more attractive faces.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of genetic algorithms in combination with a morphing software and traditional focus-group derived attractiveness scores can be used to evolve attractive synthetic faces. We have demonstrated that the evolution of attractive faces can be mimicked in software. Genetic algorithms and morphing provide a robust alternative to traditional approaches rooted in comparing attractiveness scores with a series of morphometric measurements in human subjects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18401273      PMCID: PMC3786677          DOI: 10.1097/MLG.0b013e31816bf545

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Laryngoscope        ISSN: 0023-852X            Impact factor:   3.325


  16 in total

1.  Reproductive strategy, sexual development and attraction to facial characteristics.

Authors:  R Elisabeth Cornwell; Miriam J Law Smith; Lynda G Boothroyd; Fhionna R Moore; Hasker P Davis; Michael Stirrat; Bernard Tiddeman; David I Perrett
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2006-12-29       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 2.  The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty.

Authors:  Gillian Rhodes
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 24.137

3.  The use of anthropometric proportion indices in the measurement of facial attractiveness.

Authors:  Raymond Edler; Pragati Agarwal; David Wertheim; Darrel Greenhill
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2006-01-13       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  History and current concepts in the analysis of facial attractiveness.

Authors:  Mounir Bashour
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  Evolutionary biology. The secrets of faces.

Authors:  M Enquist; S Ghirlanda
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1998-08-27       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Facial beauty. Myth or reality?

Authors:  W F Larrabee
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  1997-06

7.  Facial attractiveness: beauty and the machine.

Authors:  Yael Eisenthal; Gideon Dror; Eytan Ruppin
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.026

8.  Mate choice decisions: the role of facial beauty.

Authors:  Victor S Johnston
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2005-11-28       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  Human facial beauty: current theories and methodologies.

Authors:  Victor S Johnston; Christopher J Solomon; Stuart J Gibson; Alvaro Pallares-Bejarano
Journal:  Arch Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct

10.  Facial appearance is a cue to oestrogen levels in women.

Authors:  M J Law Smith; D I Perrett; B C Jones; R E Cornwell; F R Moore; D R Feinberg; L G Boothroyd; S J Durrani; M R Stirrat; S Whiten; R M Pitman; S G Hillier
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-01-22       Impact factor: 5.349

View more
  7 in total

1.  The aging perioral region -- Do we really know what is happening?

Authors:  N Iblher; G-B Stark; V Penna
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 4.075

2.  Morphometric facial analysis: a methodology to create lateral facial images.

Authors:  Koohyar Karimi; Zlatko Devcic; Natalie Popenko; Udochukwu Oyoyo; Brian J F Wong
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015-06-18

3.  A Quantitative Approach to Determining the Ideal Female Lip Aesthetic and Its Effect on Facial Attractiveness.

Authors:  Natalie A Popenko; Prem B Tripathi; Zlatko Devcic; Koohyar Karimi; Kathryn Osann; Brian J F Wong
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 4.611

Review 4.  Art or Science? An Evidence-Based Approach to Human Facial Beauty a Quantitative Analysis Towards an Informed Clinical Aesthetic Practice.

Authors:  Harpal Harrar; Simon Myers; Ali M Ghanem
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 2.326

5.  Personalized quantification of facial normality: a machine learning approach.

Authors:  Osman Boyaci; Erchin Serpedin; Mitchell A Stotland
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-12-07       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Why some women look young for their age.

Authors:  David A Gunn; Helle Rexbye; Christopher E M Griffiths; Peter G Murray; Amelia Fereday; Sharon D Catt; Cyrena C Tomlin; Barbara H Strongitharm; Dave I Perrett; Michael Catt; Andrew E Mayes; Andrew G Messenger; Martin R Green; Frans van der Ouderaa; James W Vaupel; Kaare Christensen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Association of Frontal and Lateral Facial Attractiveness.

Authors:  Jeffrey T Gu; David Avilla; Zlatko Devcic; Koohyar Karimi; Brian J F Wong
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2018-01-01       Impact factor: 4.611

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.