Revista CEFAC
https://revistacefac.org.br/article/doi/10.1590/1982-0216/20262812525
Revista CEFAC
Original Articles

Forensic facial identification in twins: An exploratory study

Identificação facial forense em gêmeos: estudo exploratório

Renata Silva Farias; Thaís Thamara da Silva Costa; Maria Inês Beltrati Cornacchioni Rehder; Loredana Flauzino; Maria Vanessa Martins Alves; Raphaela Barroso Guedes-Granzotti; Kelly da Silva; Carla Patrícia Hernandez Alves Ribeiro César

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982-0216/20262812525 Revista CEFAC, vol.28, n1, e2525, 2026
PDF English
PDF Português
SciELO
Downloads: 1
Views: 732

Abstract

Purpose: to verify the forensic facial aspects that allow the distinction between twins.

Methods: a sample consisting of 30 pairs of twins, mean age of 23.90 (± 6.97), the majority being female and monozygotic. Images were captured in frontal and lateral views, and the faces of the twins were compared through binary analyses consisting of holistic, morphological and photoanthropometric analysis (SAPO® software). The statistical analyses were descriptive and inferential (Student's T, Mann-Whitney and Cohen's d), with a significance level of 5%. A divergence classification that ranged from excellent (between 100 and 85%) to insufficient (below 20%), was used.

Results: in general, it was possible to find differences between the twins, and in a decreasing order, the analyses that obtained divergences were: photoanthropometric, holistic and morphological ones. Dizygotic twins presented greater divergences in the morphological analysis than monozygotic twins.

Conclusion: through facial forensic analysis, it was possible to partially distinguish the twin brothers, with better results when the techniques were used in combination.

Keywords

Face; Speech-Language Pathology; Twin Study; Facial Recognition; Anthropometry

Resumo

Objetivo: verificar os aspectos faciais forenses que permitem a distinção entre gêmeos.

Métodos: amostra constituída por 30 pares de gêmeos, idade média de 23,90 (± 6,97), sendo a maioria do gênero feminino e monozigóticos. Imagens foram capturadas nas normas frontal e laterais, sendo comparadas as faces entre os irmãos gêmeos por análises binárias constituídas das análises: holística, morfológica e fotoantropométrica (software SAPO®). As análises estatísticas foram descritivas e inferenciais (T de Student, Mann-Whitney e d de Cohen), com relevância de 5%. Foi utilizada classificação de divergências que variou de ótimo (entre 100 e 85%) a insuficiente (abaixo de 20%).

Resultados: de forma geral, foi possível encontrar diferenças entre os gêmeos. Em ordem decrescente as análises que obtiveram divergências foram: fotoantropométrica (com relevância estatística), holística e morfológica. Os gêmeos dizigóticos apresentaram maiores divergências na análise morfológica do que os monozigóticos.

Conclusão: pela análise forense facial foi possível distinguir parcialmente os irmãos gêmeos, com melhores resultados quando as técnicas foram utilizadas de forma combinada.

Palavras-chave

Face; Fonoaudiologia; Estudo em Gêmeos; Reconhecimento Facial; Antropometria

Referencias

1. Rehder MI. Identificação forense do falante. In: Rehder MI, Cazumbá LF, Cazumbá M, editors. Identificação de falantes: uma introdução à fonoaudiologia forense. Rio de Janeiro: Revinter; 2015. p. 1-6.

2. Faber J. O reconhecimento facial é baseado na comparação das faces com padrões pré- estabelecidos. Rev. Dent. Press Ortod. Ortop. Facial. 2006;11(6):15. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-54192006000600002

3. Mousavi S, Charmi M, Hassanpoor H. Recognition of identical twins based on the most distinctive region of the face: Human criteria and machine processing approaches. Multimed. tools appl. 2021;80(10):15765-802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-10360-3

4. Leung WC. Is skin ageing in the elderly caused by sun exposure or smoking? Int. j. dermatol. 2002;147(6):1187-91. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2133.2002.04991.x

5. Ichibori R, Fujiwara T, Tanigawa T, Kanazawa S, Shingaki K, Torii K et al. Objective assessment of facial skin aging and the associated environmental factors in Japanese monozygotic twins. J. cosmet. dermatol. 2014;13(2):158-63. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocd.12081 PMID: 24910280.

6. Le THNK, Luu K, Seshadri K, Savvides M. A facial aging approach to identification of identical twins. In: IEEE Fifth International Conference on Biometrics: Theory, Applications and Systems (BTAS), Arlington, VA, USA, p. 91-8, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/BTAS.2012.6374562

7. Sun Z, Paulino AA, Feng J, Chai Z, Tan T, Jain AK. A study of multibiometric traits of identical twins. Proceedings of The International Society for Optical Engineering (SPIE). 2010;7667:1-12. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.851369

8. Hersberger-Zurfluh MA, Papageorgiou SN, Motro M, Kantarci A, Will LA, Eliades T. Facial soft tissue growth in identical twins. Am. j. orthod. dentofacial orthop. 2018;154(5):683-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.01.020 PMID: 30384939.

9. Goodman LA. Snowball sampling. Ann. math. stat. [journal on the internet] 1961;32:148-70 [accessed on 2025 fev 28]. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2237615

10. Facial Identification Scientific Working Group - FISWG [webpage on the internet]. Image factors to consider in facial image comparison version 1.0, 2021 [accessed on 2024 nov 1]. Available at: https://fiswg.org/fiswg_image_factors_to_consider_in_facial_img_comparison_v1.0_2021.05.28.pdf

11. Facial Identification Scientific Working Group - FISWG [webpage on the internet]. Guidelines for image processing techniques in facial image comparison, version 2.0, 2024 [accessed on 2024 nov 1]. Available at: https://fiswg.org/fiswg_imag_procssng_tchnqs_for_fac_img_comparison_v2.0_20240607.pdf

12. OpenAI. ChatGPT [artificial inteligence tools]. Versão GPT-5. San Francisco (CA): OpenAI; 2025. Available at: https://chat.openai.com

13. Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012 PMID: 27330520.

14. Facial Identification Scientific Working Group - FISWG [webpage on the internet]. Guide for facial comparison training of examiners to competency, version 2.0, 2023 [accessed on 2024 nov 1]. Available at: https://fiswg.org/fiswg_guide_for_facial_comp_trng_of_exmrs_to_competency_v1.1_20231117.pdf

15. Petersen PE, Baez RJ. Oral health surveys: Basic methods. 5th ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.

16. Queiroz GV, Rino J, Paiva JBD, Capelozza Filho L. Analysis of reliability, accuracy, sensitivity and predictive value of a subjective method to classify facial pattern in adults. Dental Press J Orthod. 2016;21(6):58-66. https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.21.6.058-066.oar PMID: 28125141.

17. Antonio LU, Pereira MMI, Ferraz JAML. Diferenciação genética de gêmeos monozigóticos: uma importante evidência para área forense. BJFS. 2017;6(4):485-99. https://doi.org/10.17063/bjfs6(4)y2017485

18. Ozbilen EO, Basal E, Yilmaz HN, Biren S. Facial morphology differences in monozygotic twins: A retrospective stereophotogrammetric study. Angle orthod. 2023;93(6):706-11. https://doi.org/10.2319/120722-840.1 PMID: 37407504.

19. Azevedo JF. Prosopografia: identificação facial. In: Rehder MI, Cazumbá LF, Cazumbá M, editors. Identificação de falantes: uma introdução à fonoaudiologia forense. Rio de Janeiro: Revinter; 2015. p. 225-40.

20. Oliveira MODR, Curi JP, Baldasso RP, Beaini TL. Reconhecimento facial na prática forense: uma análise dos documentos disponibilizados pelo FISWG. RBOL. 2022;9(1):98-113. https://doi.org/10.21117/rbol-v9n12022-419

21. Facial Identification Scientific Working Group - FISWG [webpage on the internet]. Glossary, version 3.0, 2022 [accessed on 2024 nov 1]. Available at:: https://fiswg.org/fiswg_glossary_v3.0_20221022.pdf

22. Srinivas N, Flynn PJ, Vorder Buegge RW. Human identification using automatic and semi-automatically detected facial marks. J. forensic sci. 2016;61:S117-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.12923 PMID: 27405018.

23. Hauspie RC, Susanne C, Defrise-Gussenhoven E. Testing for the presence of genetic variance in factors of face measurements of Belgian twins. Ann. hum. Biol. 1985;12(5):429-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/03014468500007991 PMID: 4062238.

24. Falcão TN, Alves YB, Nascimento LG, Tinoco RLR, Lima LNC, Machado CEP et al. Photoanthropometry in forensics: Comparison of facial images with frontal and lateral views. Res. soc. dev. 2021;10(5):e27610514795. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i5.14795

25. Djordjevic J, Jadallah M, Zhurov AI, Toma AM, Richmond S. Three-dimensional analysis of facial shape and symmetry in twins using laser surface scanning. Orthod. craniofac. Res. 2013;16(3):146-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12012 PMID: 23323545.

26. Veyta F, Yuniastuti M, Suhartono AW, Auerkari EI. Human bite mark analysis: Review of advantage computer-assisted procedure. AIP Conference Proceedings. 2022;2537(1):030001-8. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0097979

27. Vilborn P, Bernitz H. A systematic review of 3D scanners and computer assisted analyzes of bite marks: Searching for improved analysis methods during the Covid-19 pandemic. Int J Legal Med. 2022;136(1):209-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-021-02667-z PMID: 34302214.

28. Rusia MK, Singh DK. A comprehensive survey on techniques to handle face identity threats: Challenges and opportunities. Multimed. tools appl. 2023;82(2):1669-748. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-022-13248-6 PMID: 35702682.

29. Pícoli FF, Alves AM, Mundim MBV, Mendes SDSC, Silva RF. A fragilidade da análise facial como único método de identificação humana. Braz. j. forensic sci med law bioeth. 2014;3(4):281-302. https://doi.org/10.17063/bjfs3(4)y2014281

30. Atsuchi M, Tsuji A, Usumoto Y, Yoshino M, Ikeda N. Assessment of some problematic factors in facial image identification using a 2D/3D superimposition technique. Leg Med (Tokyo). 2013;15(5):244-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2013.06.002 PMID: 23886899.

31. Sundaresan V, Shanthi SA. Monozygotic twin face recognition: An in-depth analysis and plausible improvements. Image vis. comput. 2021;116:104331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imavis.2021.104331

32. Goel R, Mehmood I, Ugail H. A study of deep learning-based face recognition models for sibling identification. Sensors. 2021;21(15):5068. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21155068 PMID: 34372306.
 

Submitted date:
02/04/2025

Accepted date:
21/10/2025

69c190bea9539542fc473509 cefac Articles
1982-0216 (Electrónico) 1516-1846 (Impreso)
Revista CEFAC ©2026 Todos los derechos reservados sobre el contenido de este sitio web. Los artículos siguen sus propias licencias.

Revista CEFAC

Share this page
Page Sections