Tag Archives: Kinship recognition

Recognizing relatedness in the face – could a super-recognizer perform better than software?

I believe that I probably could out-perform both of the interesting kinship recognition computer programs that are discussed in this most interesting recent article in New Scientist magazine, but there is still a lot to be learned from the researchers’ efforts to develop software that can detect whether two people in photographs are related. The first program described in this article had a success rate of 68% in detecting parent-child matches, the second program a 71% success rate, and people (presumably with average ability in face recognition) had a success rate of 67%. I’d love to see a similar study done with super-recognizers compared to normal human controls or pitted against a computer program. My money would be on nature’s best, rather than the latest technology.

It’s interesting to note that the first program described uses a method which I think is very different to natural face recognition, analysing fine details of the picture, while human face recognition is thought to be a process of identifying an overall pattern rather than looking at the picture piece-by-piece. The focus on details of this program appears to give the program a fair degree of robustness and flexibility in dealing with variations in the appearance of faces in photos. As researchers have found in another study (published online in the journal Cognition) , there can be considerable variability in the appearance of the same face in different photographs, and while people who are familiar with a face are able to identify the same face in different photos, people who were unfamiliar with that face did not have whatever it takes to be able to overcome variations among different photos of the same person to identify the photos as being of the same person. Clearly there is something in the memory of a person who is familiar with a face which gives their ability to recognize that face a great robustness and flexibility. I wonder what it is?

A quote from the New Scientist article: “Lu reckons that improved algorithms could be used to help determine kinship when DNA testing isn’t an option. “It can also help refugees find dispersed family members,” he suggests.” I believe that with my well above average ability in face recognition I would probably perform well in these types of tasks. I would love to work in a job or a business in which I was identifying faces or picking out related people from photographs or identifying people who have a genetic similarity (I can be contacted through leaving a comment on a blog post). Face recognition is an ability with applications that go way beyond personal socializing. Superior face recognition could be useful in many important areas of work, including law enforcement, private detective work, social work (working with adopted people or displaced families) and medicine (identifying genetic syndromes), and it appears that the current state of technological development of face photograph recognition technology is at a pretty basic level, only marginally better than the ability of the average person. In contrast, super-recognizers have a face recognition ability that far exceeds that of normal people, and I have good reason to believe that I could be a superrecognizer. I feel quite confident about my ability to detect kinship or genetic similarity from looking at people’s faces because I believe that is probably what I was involuntarily doing when I experienced The Strange Phenomenon, which I have described in the first post in this blog. Last month the British Sunday Times newspaper reported that London’s Metropolitan Police force have an elite squad of super-recognizers who have proven to be much more useful than face recogition technology. “The Met” are actively searching for more superrecognizers within their ranks to help with the huge task of identifying faces in many hours of CCTV images of the English riots. It seems odd to me that so much research is being done on creating and improving technology in face recognition when we have only just started to understand the naturally-occuring human ability in face recognition that has always existed.

Facial recognition software spots family resemblance
7 December 2011 by Kate McAlpine
Magazine issue 2842
New Scientist

Rob Jenkins, David White, Xandra Van Montfort, A. Mike Burton Variability in photos of the same face. Cognition. Available online 3 September 2011. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027711002022

A Most Peculiar Experience  https://superrecognizer.wordpress.com/2010/12/04/a-most-peculiar-experience/

Face photographs unsuitable as proof of identity due to within-person variability?  https://superrecognizer.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/face-photographs-unsuitable-as-proof-of-identity-due-to-within-person-variability/

Why might super-recognizer abilities have evolved?

There are a number of general areas and applications of face perception that I believe must be enhanced or superior in people who have excellent face recognition ability (super-recognizers?):

1. Identifying the same individual human on different occasions – face recognition

2. Identifying one’s own blood relatives or non-relatives, including a male adult perceiving whether or not an infant is one’s own genetic offspring or not. Things like hair and eye colour don’t always “breed true” and aren’t very specific, while facial features are much more distinctive and numerous.

3. Identifying blood ties among others

4. Identifying individuals who have unusual genetics or genetic anomalies, including genetic syndromes that might impact on the appearance of the face and/or the body, and also health, behaviour, intellect and/or personality

What possible significance do each of these applications of face perception have in terms of natural selection?

1. Keeping track of who does what (to who)…. Judging the character of individuals by the observed actions of individuals over a number of different interactions or observations.

2. Being able to judge the degree of relatedness of others in relation to one’s self must surely be a very useful ability in evolutionary biology. One of the biggest losers in the game of “selfish genes” is the cuckold who mistakenly raises another guy’s kids as though they are his own. He not only misses out on passing on his genes to the next generation, but he also gives two cheaters a free ride, genetically speaking, and thus also possibly misses out on the chance of devoting his resources to his own blood relatives who might not be his own offspring (kin selection). From the Wikipedia, on kin recognition: “…. if individuals have the capacity to recognize kin (kin recognition) and to adjust their behaviour on the basis of kinship (kin discrimination), then the average relatedness of the recipients of altruism could be high enough for this to be favoured.” According to the Wikipedia birds even have powers of egg recognition that can be used in response to the cuckoo-type scenario of brood parasitism: “Recognition of parasitic eggs is based on identifying pattern differences or changes in the number of eggs.”

3. Identifying blood ties among others will give a few clues about the probable loyalties and alliances of others, and it may also help to predict the behaviour of others based on observed behavioural familial traits.

4.  Identifying individuals who have genetic anomalies or unusual genetics could possibly be useful for many reasons. Such individuals might be particularly hard to predict about in terms of health, longevity, behaviour or abilities (impaired or enhanced abilities). One may wish to avoid mating with such risky stock, or to the contrary. One may wish to avoid forming trusting relationships (peer or unequal) with such individuals. Such individuals might be useful allies because they diversify the skill base of the team. Such individuals might be highly exploitable. Such individuals might bring interesting new genes to the gene pool of the family/tribe.