Identity conclusion based on matching measured proportions

If a facial report bases identity solely on ratios between facial landmarks, landmark uncertainty and uncontrolled capture conditions require a separate methodological assessment. Several explanations may be possible, so the specific materials are examined in full, preserving information about their provenance and preparation conditions. The proposition to be tested is defined before comparative assessment of the features.

What needs to be clarified

The task is to check the methodological suitability and grounds for metric arguments, distinguishing observed features from their interpretation. The assessment must consider the suitability of each item and whether the grounds for the proposed conclusion can be checked.

Materials to prepare

Complete report with measurements and formulae
Source images before scaling or geometric processing
Landmark map and measurement procedure

What to compare

Check landmark placement, source resolution and image transformations; assess ratio sensitivity to point selection, independent morphological analysis and compliance with photo-anthropometry limitations. Every significant feature is linked to a specific part of the material. Similarities and differences are assessed together, considering alternative explanations and the limitations of the examination method.

Possible outcome of the analysis

A possible deliverable is a review of the facial-comparison method, with verifiable examples and reasons for the assessment. Unresolved questions and additional examinations needed are stated separately, without promising an answer in advance.

Limits of the conclusions

Matching measured ratios alone does not establish identity. Conclusions are confined to the examined items and stated conditions; insufficient features require an explicit finding that the relevant question cannot be resolved.