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 accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Learning representations by back-propagating errors
Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., & Williams, R. J. (1986) · Nature · doi:10.1038/323533a0 · Cited by 31,892
Turk, M., & Pentland, A. (1991) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn.1991.3.1.71 · Cited by 13,733
Cootes, T. F., Edwards, G. J., & Taylor, C. J. (2001) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/34.927467 · Cited by 5,409
Automatic analysis of facial expressions: the state of the art
Pantie, M., & Rothkrantz, L. J. M. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/34.895976 · Cited by 1,778 · cited 1×
“In this context, systems capable of identifying faces [14], recognizing emotions [19], gender [17], and head orientation [16] have been developed.”
Background
Cited by
Automatic Age Estimation Based on Facial Aging Patterns
Geng, X., Zhou, Z.-H., & Smith-Miles, K. (2007) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2007.70733 · Cited by 964
Age Synthesis and Estimation via Faces: A Survey
Fu, Y., Guo, G., & Huang, T. S. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2010.36 · Cited by 569
Human Age Estimation With Regression on Discriminative Aging Manifold
Fu, Y., & Huang, T. S. (2008) · IEEE Transactions on Multimedia · doi:10.1109/tmm.2008.921847 · Cited by 422
Understanding images of groups of people
Gallagher, A. C., & Chen, T. (2009) · 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2009.5206828 · Cited by 351
Ordinal hyperplanes ranker with cost sensitivities for age estimation
Chang, K.-Y., Chen, C.-S., & Hung, Y.-P. (2011) · CVPR 2011 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2011.5995437 · Cited by 342
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.