Scribd
Upload
10 views1 page

Paper Title

The document reviews various techniques for facial attractiveness assessment using machine learning, highlighting different models and their accuracy rates. Key limitations include sensitivity to lighting, lack of wellness considerations, and cultural biases in datasets. The research primarily focuses on enhancing beauty rather than health or wellness outcomes.

Uploaded by

Zeeshan Asghar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
10 views1 page

Paper Title

The document reviews various techniques for facial attractiveness assessment using machine learning, highlighting different models and their accuracy rates. Key limitations include sensitivity to lighting, lack of wellness considerations, and cultural biases in datasets. The research primarily focuses on enhancing beauty rather than health or wellness outcomes.

Uploaded by

Zeeshan Asghar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Paper Title Author(s) Technique Key Source Year Limitations Researc

Results Ident

FA-GANs: Jingwu He FA-GAN Accuracy: arXiv 2020 Sensitive to Focuses o


Facial et al. ~70% preprint lighting; beauty
Attractiveness (Male & frontal view enhancem
Enhancement Female) only rather tha
with Generative health or
Adversarial wellness
Networks for
Frontal Faces
FIAC-Net: Jawan FIAC-Net Accuracy IEEE Xplore 2022 No wellness Static
Facial Image Najeeb (Lightweight ≈ 88% or lifestyle attractive
Attractiveness Saeed et al. DCNN) factors classifica
Classification considered without
Based on Light actionabl
DCNN recomme

Frontal facial Ricardo Golden ~80% Journal of 2024 Female-only Reinforce


analysis of Gorilo et al. Ratio-based similarity Cranio- dataset; unrealisti
female celebrity facial score Maxillofacial celebrity bias; standards
attractiveness geometry Surgery frontal view lacks incl
standards
through AI
Human-like Mohammad KNN, SVR R² ≈ 0.99; International 2023 Cultural bias; No ethica
evaluation by Karimi RMSE ≈ Journal of attractiveness framewor
facial Moridani et 0.005 Cognitive -centric psycholo
attractiveness al. Computing evaluation considera
intelligent in
machine Engineering

Enhancing Jingu Xu et Mixture of Accuracy IEEE Xplore 2025 Poor Not speci
healthcare al. Experts ≈ 81% performance for facial
recommendatio (MOE) with on low- or user
n systems with LLMs quality interactio
multimodal images; not
LLM-based face-specific
MOE
architecture

You might also like