Reply to post: @c1ue

@c1ue

I suspect that is a large part of the issue, a human or an animal can make a multi pass assessment of a face and still get it wrong, if my experience is anything to go by, but that is a different story. An initial human scan of a crowd will possibly result in some hits, or perhaps no hits, so on a second, third, or forth scan, additional data will be sought, until the confidence level rises. Animals and humans, to a lesser extent can call in other aids, a sense of smell, analysis of body language, etc. Can the expert system even check for more data points, does the expert system even experience moving images, does it have any relevant experience of dealing with crowds in crowd situations where subjects might be distracted, etc.? With a lot more evolution these system should improve, but my confidence in that happening is limited. I suspect that the initial inputs are all that the devices will ever get, with no option to increase either the setup ('training') data, or the live field data data points. I doubt that a current system could easily realise that a subject with a proverbial wooden leg, or even no leg would not be the same as a face connected to no such 'feature'. Most humans and probably most animals would take that in automatically. Make up and glasses are already to fool systems, (and some humans), I suspect that will continue to be the case for sometime.