Premium
Comparison Among Manual Facial Approximations Conducted by Two Methodological Approaches of Face Prediction
Author(s) -
Herrera Lara Maria,
Strapasson Raíssa Ananda Paim,
Zanin Alice Aquino,
Silva Jorge Vicente Lopes,
Melani Rodolfo Francisco Haltenhoff
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
journal of forensic sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.715
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1556-4029
pISSN - 0022-1198
DOI - 10.1111/1556-4029.13435
Subject(s) - face (sociological concept) , facial reconstruction , artificial intelligence , nose , orthodontics , facial recognition system , pattern recognition (psychology) , significant difference , computer science , mathematics , psychology , computer vision , medicine , statistics , anatomy , surgery , social science , sociology
This study verified the difference between two methods of forensic facial approximation ( FFA ) regarding recognition and resemblance rates. Three‐dimensional models of skulls were obtained from computerized tomography ( CT ) scans of two subjects (targets). Two manual FFA s were performed for each target, by applying two different guidelines for the facial structures (what we called “American method” ( AM ) and “Combined method” ( CM )). Unfamiliar assessors evaluated the sculptures by recognition and resemblance tests. The AM was that which allowed more correct responses of recognition and higher resemblance's scores for the male target ( p < 0.001). Regarding guidelines for modeling characteristics of the face, the ones that are practical and easily performed for sculptures, such as the length of the anterior nasal spine multiplied by 3 for nose prediction, may offer better results in terms of resemblance.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom