Karl Ricanek

Hera Siddiqui, Ajita Rattani, Karl Ricanek et al.

Obesity is one of the most important public health problems that the world is facing today. A recent trend is in the development of intervention tools that predict BMI using facial images for weight monitoring and management to combat obesity. Most of these studies used BMI annotated facial image datasets that mainly consisted of Caucasian subjects. Research on bias evaluation of face-based gender-, age-classification, and face recognition systems suggest that these technologies perform poorly for women, dark-skinned people, and older adults. The bias of facial analysis-based BMI prediction tools has not been studied until now. This paper evaluates the bias of facial-analysis-based BMI prediction models across Caucasian and African-American Males and Females. Experimental investigations on the gender, race, and BMI balanced version of the modified MORPH-II dataset suggested that the error rate in BMI prediction was least for Black Males and highest for White Females. Further, the psychology-related facial features correlated with weight suggested that as the BMI increases, the changes in the facial region are more prominent for Black Males and the least for White Females. This is the reason for the least error rate of the facial analysis-based BMI prediction tool for Black Males and highest for White Females.

Haiyu Wu, Sicong Tian, Aman Bhatta et al.

Reported face verification accuracy has reached a plateau on current well-known test sets. As a result, some difficult test sets have been assembled by reducing the image quality or adding artifacts to the image. However, we argue that test sets can be challenging without artificially reducing the image quality because the face recognition (FR) models suffer from correctly recognizing 1) the pairs from the same identity (i.e., genuine pairs) with a large face attribute difference, 2) the pairs from different identities (i.e., impostor pairs) with a small face attribute difference, and 3) the pairs of similar-looking identities (e.g., twins and relatives). We propose three challenging test sets to reveal important but ignored weaknesses of the existing FR algorithms. To challenge models on variation of facial attributes, we propose Hadrian and Eclipse to address facial hair differences and face exposure differences. The images in both test sets are high-quality and collected in a controlled environment. To challenge FR models on similar-looking persons, we propose twins-IND, which contains images from a dedicated twins dataset. The LFW test protocol is used to structure the proposed test sets. Moreover, we introduce additional rules to assemble "Goldilocks1" level test sets, including 1) restricted number of occurrence of hard samples, 2) equal chance evaluation across demographic groups, and 3) constrained identity overlap across validation folds. Quantitatively, without further processing the images, the proposed test sets have on-par or higher difficulties than the existing test sets. The datasets are available at: https: //github.com/HaiyuWu/SOTA-Face-Recognition-Train-and-Test.

Vítor Albiero, Nisha Srinivas, Esteban Villalobos et al.

Matching live images (``selfies'') to images from ID documents is a problem that can arise in various applications. A challenging instance of the problem arises when the face image on the ID document is from early adolescence and the live image is from later adolescence. We explore this problem using a private dataset called Chilean Young Adult (CHIYA) dataset, where we match live face images taken at age 18-19 to face images on ID documents created at ages 9 to 18. State-of-the-art deep learning face matchers (e.g., ArcFace) have relatively poor accuracy for document-to-selfie face matching. To achieve higher accuracy, we fine-tune the best available open-source model with triplet loss for a few-shot learning. Experiments show that our approach achieves higher accuracy than the DocFace+ model recently developed for this problem. Our fine-tuned model was able to improve the true acceptance rate for the most difficult (largest age span) subset from 62.92% to 96.67% at a false acceptance rate of 0.01%. Our fine-tuned model is available for use by other researchers.