“There’s pretty much no law on what you can do to a crime scene sample,”
February 23, 2015 12:47 PM   Subscribe

Using DNA to Build a Face, and a Case by Andrew Pollack [New York Times]
The growing capability to determine physical characteristics from genetics can help the police, but it also raises questions of rights and profiling.
posted by Fizz (12 comments total) 7 users marked this as a favorite
 


Apparently we can't predict eyebrows yet.
posted by maryr at 12:53 PM on February 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


The given comparisons are not particularly impressive, IMO. It doesn't seem to have very broad skin tones (compare the two African-American examples - two pretty different skin tones IRL vs. exactly the same skin tone in the DNA-generated examples) and the eyes all seem wrong to me (why does everyone but the man on the lower-left have such hooded eyes?)
posted by muddgirl at 1:23 PM on February 23, 2015


That's a lot of handwringing, but what specifically are you recommending? More data is better.

DNA testing is being used right now to reverse decades-old wrongful convictions and free those poor victims of our system.

The less we depend on testimony of police and "expert" opinions, the better.
posted by IAmBroom at 2:17 PM on February 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


The problem isn't with the science, its how its used.

Sometimes bad science leads to bad use.
Dr. Shriver and his main collaborator, Peter Claes of KU Leuven in Belgium, have developed a complex mathematical method to represent faces, based on measuring the three-dimensional coordinates of more than 7,000 points on the face.

They developed a way to create a sort of generic face based on the person’s sex and ancestry mix, as determined from their DNA. They then adjust that face based on 24 genetic variants in 20 genes shown to be involved in facial variation.

The researchers said in their papers that their ancestry and gender analysis explained only about 23 percent of the variation in faces and that the genetic variants did not really add much detail.
Emphasis added.
posted by muddgirl at 2:19 PM on February 23, 2015 [6 favorites]


Wow, they still have a way to go but being able to read DNA into a rendering is pretty fucking cool. I imagine as time goes on and we start to learn more about genetics, this kind of thing can be improved. Of course, we'll also have a long way to go before character face generation is very realistic. I've never seen a player-created face that actually looks like themselves or a real person.
posted by GoblinHoney at 2:19 PM on February 23, 2015


Sometimes I don't understand how humans can be so smart and so dumb at the same time.

Snarky answer: because humans are not the borg, with a single unified mind.

More serious answer: because one person's interesting, non-judgmental illustrative use of technology is another's attempt to solve crime with any crazy new gadget possible, even when it doesn't make sense, 'cause we have the budget thanks to "heightened security concerns" (aka a bigger check for police militarization).
posted by filthy light thief at 2:51 PM on February 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


This doesn't get scary until the faces that it generates can be auto-matched to the actual face of the genetic source. Fortunately it seems unlikely that we're anywhere close to that level of detail. It seems to me that the short term main use of this is similar to the slightly scary looking "e-fit" pictures they generate based on witness descriptions - it's a way of providing a slightly more relevant picture which might jog someone's memory or otherwise provide a lead in a crime.

Given that once you've actually got the person you're looking for, normal DNA analysis can pin them down absolutely, there's no need for this ever to be used in court. If anything, I would have thought that this technology would reduce police profiling based on stereotypes, instead driving them to look for suspects based on their actual features. Is that not potentially a good thing?
posted by leo_r at 3:37 PM on February 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


Yeah, I'm not really sure what the problem is with this. The thing about racial profiling we dislike is when they automatically assume, in the absence of evidence, that certain races are more likely to be criminals. It is not racial profiling if they have a witness statement or a DNA statement that says the perp was in fact of that race.
posted by corb at 4:05 PM on February 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


The racial profiling concern, I suspect, comes from the fact that so far it looks pretty bad at generating faces in a way that is not race-neutral at all. It's not racial-profiling in and of itself, but it will lead to more arrests of black suspects just because they are black, and not because there is actual evidence that they did it.

For an example straight from the article, if there's a witness who says the suspect was light-skinned, but the profile rather crudely generated from DNA evidence looks like, say, the guy in the "DNA Snapshot" picture, who are the police going to be looking for?
posted by muddgirl at 4:24 PM on February 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


What does it do with people of mixed ancestry?
posted by overeducated_alligator at 5:39 PM on February 23, 2015


The Unreconstructed M by Phil Dick

(public domain)
posted by charlie don't surf at 9:02 PM on February 23, 2015


« Older cybermapping   |   The second flag was so much more photogenic Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments