Purpose of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies

Support the IEET

The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Search the IEET
Subscribe and Contribute to:

Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view

whats new at ieet

IEET Launching Annual Fundraiser

Political Transhumanism and the Transhumanist Party

Using Neurotechnologies to Enhance Virtues

Unfettered Religious Freedom Really Does Mean the Freedom to Do Harm

“I Don’t See Class”

A Fleet of Jets: A Critical Look at the Business of African Pentecostalism

ieet books

Anticipating Tomorrow’s Politics
Ed. David Wood


instamatic on 'Armed with Cameras...' (Apr 1, 2015)

Rick Searle on 'The Sofalarity is Near' (Apr 1, 2015)

CygnusX1 on 'The Sofalarity is Near' (Apr 1, 2015)

Rick Searle on 'The Sofalarity is Near' (Apr 1, 2015)

CygnusX1 on 'The Sofalarity is Near' (Apr 1, 2015)

Peter Wicks on 'Armed with Cameras...' (Apr 1, 2015)

instamatic on 'Armed with Cameras...' (Mar 31, 2015)

Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List


Enframing the Flesh: Heidegger, Transhumanism, and the Body as “Standing Reserve”

Moral Enhancement and Political Realism

Intelligent Technologies and Lost Life

Hottest Articles of the Last Month

IEET Launching Annual Fundraiser
Mar 18, 2015
(4003) Hits
(0) Comments

The nanobots are coming back
Mar 10, 2015
(7502) Hits
(0) Comments

The Sofalarity is Near
Mar 30, 2015
(7219) Hits
(8) Comments

Posthumanisms: A Carnapian Experiment
Mar 19, 2015
(5896) Hits
(4) Comments

IEET > Rights > PostGender > Vision > Bioculture > Technoprogressivism > Contributors > Kyle Munkittrick

Print Email permalink (4) Comments (6725) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg

Processing Beauty

Kyle Munkittrick
By Kyle Munkittrick
Pop Transhumanism

Posted: Mar 28, 2010

Oh, computer scientists, is there nothing they won’t try to quantify?


Amit Kaigen of Tel Aviv University and his team have developed a computer algorithm to recognize beauty:

In the first step of the study, 30 men and women were presented with 100 different faces of Caucasian women, roughly of the same age, and were asked to judge the beauty of each face. The subjects rated the images on a scale of 1 through 7 and did not explain why they chose certain scores. Kagian and his colleagues then went to the computer and processed and mapped the geometric shape of facial features mathematically.

Additional features such as face symmetry, smoothness of the skin and hair color were fed into the analysis as well. Based on human preferences, the machine “learned” the relation between facial features and attractiveness scores and was then put to the test on a fresh set of faces.

The article is well written, fair, and Kaigen is keenly aware of how early on this study is, as well as his own personal beauty failings. What struck me was that the same data wasn’t drawn on male faces, and furthermore that the numbers were so low, only 100 images and 30 participants. I appreciate the goal of Kaigen and his team, but would really like to see the same study done online, anonymously. Just put up 100,000 pictures of people from around the world and have each person sign in with vital statistics. I understand that the data wouldn’t be up to research standards, but it would give the algorithm much more data to work with and present a much broader understanding of beauty.

But let’s come back to the original data set for a second: thirty Caucasian women. In short, Kaigen’s team preselected what were already “beautiful” people – white women – and then had people select from there. Having computers able to process a huge volume of data seems utterly wasted on pre-selecting the data-set with such an extreme bias towards race and then further restricting it to a single sex.

Here are some ideas I’d love to see Kaigen and his team try in their research:

  • Add other races.
  • Add men.
  • Take a data-set and alter the skin tone of the pictures, so that light-skinned people are dark-skinned, and visa versa.
  • Mix and match facial features. Create deliberately androgynous faces and see what happens.
  • Add false “aggregate scores” to see how much influence the opinion of others affects perception of beauty.
  • Using blending software, create faces that are “beautiful” or “medium” or “ugly” but not unique, to see if minor flaws contribute to beauty, as well as if synthesizing levels out or undermines perceived non-beauty.
  • Increase sample size dramatically, gather data from those who live in non-Western and/or non-Caucasian regions.
  • Conduct the experiment with data/subject race correlation that isn’t Caucasian, then use the “beautiful” faces with non-correlating data/subject groups.

Any other ideas?

I don’t mean to argue that this sort of research isn’t useful, but as aesthetics is an incredibly constructed and fickle form of judgment, there is a lot more work to be done here. Also, perhaps with a reasonably large and comprehensive data set, we can start to see where biological attraction and social attraction overlap and separate.

Kyle Munkittrick, IEET Program Director: Envisioning the Future, is a recent graduate of New York University, where he received his Master's in bioethics and critical theory.
Print Email permalink (4) Comments (6726) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg


I would suggest to do the study two-ways : not only digitalize the faces of the people that are evaluating beauty, but also the faces of the evaluators.  Who knows that people like other people looking a bit like themselves ?
And yes : a lot of races, the two genders, any age, ...
When it comes to the two genders, you should also indicate the gender of the evaluator and whether he/she is straight or gay.

The large database you’re looking for exists. It’s called hotoronot.com. In fact, some psychologists have received permission to use the data in their research. I presume that the researchers in question couldn’t.

Yes, it is culturally (and racially?) biased, but so is our perception of beauty (to an extent).

It should be noted that it is irrelevant what data the researches train their program on, or how they proceed with the training. All that matters is that the program’s ratings have a high degree of conformity to data collected from a large database such as hotornot.com.

Bravo, Kyle! Thanks for pointing out the institutional racism that has caused problems for so long for too many.

It would be interesting to see if people who can put a person in one of these beauty classes

below average
above average

can also put the person in an IQ class just by their looks and get it right or almost right most of the time.

YOUR COMMENT (IEET's comment policy)

Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: Life Extension – a conservative enterprise?

Previous entry: Smart Girl


RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter |
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
56 Daleville School Rd., Willington CT 06279 USA 
Email: director @ ieet.org     phone: 860-297-2376