| Literature DB >> 35721413 |
Arshad Abbas1, Muhammad Shoaib1.
Abstract
Facial images are used for kinship verification. Traditional convolutional neural networks and transfer learning-based approaches are presently used for kinship identification. The transfer-learning approach is useful in many fields. However, it does not perform well in the identification of humans' kinship because transfer-learning models are trained on a different type of data that is significantly different as compared to human face image data, a technique which may be able for kinship identification by comparing images of parents and their children with transformed age instead of comparing their actual images is required. In this article, a technique for kinship identification using a Siamese neural network and age transformation algorithm is proposed. The results are satisfactory as an overall accuracy of 76.38% has been achieved. Further work can be carried out to improve the accuracy by improving the Life Span Age Transformation (LAT) algorithm for kinship identification using facial images.Entities:
Keywords: Age transformation; Algorithms and analysis of algorithms; Artificial intelligence; Computer education; Convolutional neural networks; Data mining & machine learning; Data science; Face encoding; Kinship identification; Social computing
Year: 2022 PMID: 35721413 PMCID: PMC9202613 DOI: 10.7717/peerj-cs.987
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ Comput Sci ISSN: 2376-5992
Figure 1High level methodology of proposed study.
Diagram showing the operation of the methodology.
Figure 2Effect of age transformation.
Diagram to elaborate effect of age transformation on facial images. Source credit: https://web.northeastern.edu/smilelab/fiw/.
Figure 3Working of proposed methodology.
This diagram shows working of proposed methodology, how methodology works to achieve kinship identification. Source credit: https://web.northeastern.edu/smilelab/fiw/.
Figure 4Flow of model training with age transformation and face encoding.
This diagram shows flow of model training with age transformation and face encoding. Source credit: https://web.northeastern.edu/smilelab/fiw/.
Parameters of deep relational network.
| Setting | Input size | Output size | Kernel | Stride | Padding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SIAMESE NETWORK | 3 * 256 * 256 | 512 * 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 |
| DENSE-1+ BN + RELU | 512 * 1 | 256 * 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| DENSE-2 + BN + RELU | 256 * 1 | 256 * 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| DENSE-3 | 256 * 1 | 128 * 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| Relational Network | |||||
| Conv-1+ BN + RELU | 10 × 128 × 128 × 128 | 3 | 1 | 2 | |
| Conv-2+ BN + RELU | 10 × 128 × 128 × 128 | 3 | 1 | 2 | |
| Conv-3+ BN + RELU | 10 × 128 × 128 × 128 | 3 | 1 | 2 | |
| Dense (Flatten) + SIGMOID | 1 × 128 | Kin/Not Kin | |||
Achieved model performance for different relationships.
| Training accuracy | Validation accuracy | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relation | Accuracy (%) | Relation | Accuracy (%) | Mean (%) |
| Father-Son | 80.12 | Father-Son | 76.16 | 78.14 |
| Father-Daughter | 77.15 | Father-Daughter | 73.00 | 75.07 |
| Mother-Son | 75.75 | Mother-Son | 72.75 | 74.25 |
| Mother-Daughter | 79.17 | Mother-Daughter | 77.0 | 78.08 |
| Overall Mean | 76.38 | |||
Comparison of results on baseline dataset with other models.
| Sr. No. | Methodology | Classifier | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cosine similarity | 69.18 | |
| 2 | GAN | 71.16 | |
| 3 | Pre-trained CNN | 73.21 | |
| 4 | Proposed Methodology | Pre-trained LATS + Siamese | 76.38 |