Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 569

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparing Different Classifiers for Automatic Age Estimation

Open access
Lanitis, A., Draganova, C., Christodoulou, C.·2004·IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics)

Abstract

We describe a quantitative evaluation of the performance of different classifiers in the task of automatic age estimation. In this context, we generate a statistical model of facial appearance, which is subsequently used as the basis for obtaining a compact parametric description of face images. The aim of our work is to design classifiers that accept the model-based representation of unseen images and produce an estimate of the age of the person in the corresponding face image. For this application, we have tested different classifiers: a classifier based on the use of quadratic functions for modeling the relationship between face model parameters and age, a shortest distance classifier, and artificial neural network based classifiers. We also describe variations to the basic method where we use age-specific and/or appearance specific age estimation methods. In this context, we use age estimation classifiers for each age group and/or classifiers for different clusters of subjects within our training set. In those cases, part of the classification procedure is devoted to choosing the most appropriate classifier for the subject/age range in question, so that more accurate age estimates can be obtained. We also present comparative results concerning the performance of humans and computers in the task of age estimation. Our results indicate that machines can estimate the age of a person almost as reliably as humans.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tsmcb.2003.817091

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 569

Metadata

Authors
Lanitis, A., Draganova, C., & Christodoulou, C.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics)
Published
2004-02
Volume
34
Issue
1
Pages
621-628
ISSN
1083-4419 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2163626514
Cited by
569
References
4
FWCI
8.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparing Different Classifiers for Automatic Age Estimation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tsmcb.2003.817091
The paper
Lanitis, A., Draganova, C., & Christodoulou, C. (2004). Comparing Different Classifiers for Automatic Age Estimation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics). https://doi.org/10.1109/tsmcb.2003.817091

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.