Targeting specific facial variation for different identification tasks.

A conceptual framework that allows faces to be studied and compared objectively with biological validity is presented. The framework is a logical extension of modern morphometrics and statistical shape analysis techniques. Three dimensional (3D) facial scans were collected from 255 healthy young adults. One scan depicted a smiling facial expression and another scan depicted a neutral expression. These facial scans were modelled in a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) space where Euclidean (ED) and Mahalanobis (MD) distances were used to form similarity measures. Within this PCA space, property pathways were calculated that expressed the direction of change in facial expression. Decomposition of distances into property-independent (D1) and dependent components (D2) along these pathways enabled the comparison of two faces in terms of the extent of a smiling expression. The performance of all distances was tested and compared in dual types of experiments: Classification tasks and a Recognition task. In the Classification tasks, individual facial scans were assigned to one or more population groups of smiling or neutral scans. The property-dependent (D2) component of both Euclidean and Mahalanobis distances performed best in the Classification task, by correctly assigning 99.8% of scans to the right population group. The recognition task tested if a scan of an individual depicting a smiling/neutral expression could be positively identified when shown a scan of the same person depicting a neutral/smiling expression. ED1 and MD1 performed best, and correctly identified 97.8% and 94.8% of individual scans respectively as belonging to the same person despite differences in facial expression. It was concluded that decomposed components are superior to straightforward distances in achieving positive identifications and presents a novel method for quantifying facial similarity. Additionally, although the undecomposed Mahalanobis distance often used in practice outperformed that of the Euclidean, it was the opposite result for the decomposed distances.

[1]  Paul Suetens,et al.  Statistically deformable face models for cranio-facial reconstruction , 2005, ISPA 2005. Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Image and Signal Processing and Analysis, 2005..

[2]  Kristina Aldridge,et al.  Precision and error of three‐dimensional phenotypic measures acquired from 3dMD photogrammetric images , 2005, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[3]  Paul Suetens,et al.  Craniofacial reconstruction using a combined statistical model of face shape and soft tissue depths: methodology and validation. , 2006, Forensic science international.

[4]  Gordon Erlebacher,et al.  A novel technique for face recognition using range imaging , 2003, Seventh International Symposium on Signal Processing and Its Applications, 2003. Proceedings..

[5]  M. Zelditch,et al.  Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists , 2012 .

[6]  R. V. Taylor Analysis of three-dimensional craniofacial images: applications in forensic science, anthropology and clinical medicine , 2008 .

[7]  C. Liu,et al.  Lighting direction affects recognition of untextured faces in photographic positive and negative , 1999, Vision Research.

[8]  G. Pike,et al.  Recognizing moving faces: The relative contribution of motion and perspective view information. , 1997 .

[9]  Alexander M. Bronstein,et al.  Expression-Invariant 3D Face Recognition , 2003, AVBPA.

[10]  L. Farkas Anthropometry of the head and face in medicine , 1981 .

[11]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Handbook of Face Recognition, 2nd Edition , 2011 .

[12]  R. Hennekam,et al.  3D analysis of facial morphology , 2004, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[13]  Hao Zhang,et al.  Adapting Geometric Attributes for Expression-Invariant 3D Face Recognition , 2007, IEEE International Conference on Shape Modeling and Applications 2007 (SMI '07).

[14]  V. Bruce,et al.  Matching identities of familiar and unfamiliar faces caught on CCTV images. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[15]  J. Waddington,et al.  Facial surface analysis by 3D laser scanning and geometric morphometrics in relation to sexual dimorphism in cerebral–craniofacial morphogenesis and cognitive function , 2005, Journal of anatomy.

[16]  Dirk Vandermeulen,et al.  Objective 3D face recognition: Evolution, approaches and challenges. , 2010, Forensic science international.

[17]  Josef Kittler,et al.  Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Audio- and video-based biometric person authentication , 2003 .

[18]  Michael G. Strintzis,et al.  3-D Face Recognition With the Geodesic Polar Representation , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[19]  K. Mardia,et al.  Statistical Shape Analysis , 1998 .