Women's Attractiveness Judged by Software

Roland Piquepaille writes "According to Haaretz, an Israeli team of computer scientists has developed software that ranks facial attractiveness of women. Instead of identifying basic facial characteristics, this software has been designed to make aesthetic judgments — after training. The lead researcher said this program 'constitutes a substantial advance in the development of artificial intelligence.' It is interesting to note that the researchers focused on women only. Apparently, men' faces are more difficult to grade."

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:more average is more attractive

[LaskoVortex]

This [nih.gov] is the paper. There were several faces more attractive than the average. So, a conclusion from that paper was that you can't do wrong with average, but you can do better on occasion.

Software already exisits

[Special650]

Its called "Am I hot or not?" I won't even google it to see if it still is there

Re:Woman scientists will retaliate...

[indiechild]

You should read material by David DeAngelo. It sounds like you don't really understand attraction, or women in general. Wealth doesn't really have much to do with attraction, but power and excitement do.

And stay away from your ex; ideally you should break off all contact. She's already demonstrated once that she will cheat, there is absolutely nothing to stop her from doing it again.

I agree that you need to catch her early before she cheats -- but this cannot be achieved by preventing her from seeing other men or getting jealous and angry. If she's looking elsewhere, that means you're not exciting enough, i.e. boring. If her sexual and attraction needs are being met (and ideally exceeded) at home then there is no need for her to be looking elsewhere.

Also, men outwardly displaying signs of jealousy is not a good thing, it signifies that the man is of "low social value".

We're geeks, we're smart, we should empower ourselves by learning about this stuff rather than stumbling around in the dark.

Flaw in "average" beauty: smooth skin

[KWTm]

I read a web site somewhere about some German researchers trying to figure out what was "beautiful" by taking eight of the top Miss Germany contestants (including the winner) and algorithmically averaged their eight faces into a ninth composite face. To be fair, the beauty queen contestants had to wear no makeup and have a neutral expression on their face. They let people rank the nine faces in terms of beauty, and it turned out that the non-existent ninth "averaged" face was ranked the most beautiful.

They then expounded on how people found an average prototypical face the most beautiful.

When I checked back later with the web site, they had added an addendum to the web site, saying something to the effect of, "Oh, yeah, we also found that, by averaging the photos together, we smoothed out any skin blemishes on the face, and maybe it could be possible that there's a chance that somehow people were just finding that the ninth average face had the smoothest skin and was thus the most beautiful."

In other words, "We completely forgot to account for the superhumanly flawless skin in the algorithmically generated face, which invalidates all this work we've done, but we've put so much work into this project that we don't want to throw it all into the trash just yet." Kinda like how a PhD candidate researching a breakthrough in space-dwelling aliens might add, at the very end of his thesis, "Oh, or it might have been just ants crawling on the lens of the telescope. Woops."