https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=498024
--- Comment #22 from Michael Miller <michael_mil...@msn.com> --- (In reply to haselnuss87 from comment #21) > Hello Mike, I am facing the same issue as René. First, SFace worked > significantly better after training a few faces. The more faces I trained > though, the worse face recognition became. > > Here are my answers to your questions: > > > How many different people have a confirmed face in your library? > 652 > > How many confirmed faces do you have in total? > 26,264 > > Did you remove ALL faces including confirmed, unconfirmed, and unknow and > > restart with face detection, or are you retraining with faces that were > > found with older versions of digiKam? > I retained confirmed faces and retrained with faces that were newly detected > by YuNet as well as faces that were detected by older digiKam versions. Hello, Thank you for the information. Face recognition will never be 100%. There will always be a margin of error. I'm trying to determine if the results are due to a bug, a mislabeled face, or if it's within the margin of error. For version 8.5.0, the margin of error is about 5%. In version 8.6.0 the margin of error is deceased to about 2%-3%. With over 26,000 confirmed faces, there could be over 1,300 errors and still be within the expected margin of error. For the erroneously identified faces, is there a common pattern you can see? For example, faces for the same unidentified person are matching to the same confirmed person? This is usually an indicator of an incorrectly confirmed face. I think -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
