Insights · Whole face · Measurement

Bilateral asymmetry index

Mean distance between each landmark and the mirror image of its bilateral partner across the facial midline, as a percentage of interpupillary distance.

Confidence
Tier B · wide interval
Unit
% of total
Landmarks
midline
CI floor
± 0.8
mean_i |p_i − reflect(p_partner(i))| / IPD × 100, midline fitted through midline landmarks
Measure yours
Illustration · on your scan the same lines are drawn on your own photo

How to read it

Below the mean

the face is highly bilaterally symmetric at the resolution of the landmark detector.

Near the mean

a typical degree of bilateral asymmetry. Every face is asymmetric; the noise floor shown is how much of this value the detector itself contributes.

Above the mean

above-typical bilateral asymmetry at this resolution. Before reading anything into it: head yaw of even a few degrees inflates this value more than most real asymmetry does. Lee et al. (2025), with 400 raters, found no significant relationship between symmetry and attractiveness once averageness was controlled.

Caveat

A symmetry score from a photo mostly measures landmark jitter plus head yaw. It is included because people ask for it, and reported with its noise floor so it cannot be over-read.

Reference values by population

Reference populationFemale (mean ± SD)Male (mean ± SD)nSource
North American White3.2 ± 1.23.2 ± 1.2Typical range for healthy adults measured with 2D landmarks incl. detector noise. Provisional; not a population anthropometric value. prov.
East Asian3.2 ± 1.23.2 ± 1.2Typical range for healthy adults measured with 2D landmarks incl. detector noise. Provisional; not a population anthropometric value. prov.
South Asian3.2 ± 1.23.2 ± 1.2Typical range for healthy adults measured with 2D landmarks incl. detector noise. Provisional; not a population anthropometric value. prov.
African / African diaspora3.2 ± 1.23.2 ± 1.2Typical range for healthy adults measured with 2D landmarks incl. detector noise. Provisional; not a population anthropometric value. prov.
Middle Eastern3.2 ± 1.23.2 ± 1.2Typical range for healthy adults measured with 2D landmarks incl. detector noise. Provisional; not a population anthropometric value. prov.
Hispanic / Latino3.2 ± 1.23.2 ± 1.2Typical range for healthy adults measured with 2D landmarks incl. detector noise. Provisional; not a population anthropometric value. prov.
Not specified — show pooled3.2 ± 1.23.2 ± 1.2Typical range for healthy adults measured with 2D landmarks incl. detector noise. Provisional; not a population anthropometric value. prov.
Where these numbers come from

Transcribed from the cited anthropometric literature; SDs of ratios are propagated conservatively (independence assumed). Entries marked prov. await line-by-line audit against the primary tables — see the norm provenance note.

Why every value has an error bar

Every value Canthion reports carries a 1σ uncertainty propagated from MediaPipe Face Mesh's published accuracy (3.96% of inter-ocular distance mean absolute error per landmark, Kartynnik 2019). For a typical 300 px inter-pupil photo that is ≈12 px per landmark, which is why small ratios and angles get wide intervals. A number without an interval is a number pretending to be more precise than it is.

References
  • Lee, Li, Rafiee, Jones & Shiramizu (2025). Further evidence that averageness and femininity, rather than symmetry and masculinity, predict facial attractiveness judgments. Sci Rep 15:5498. doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-86974-0
  • Kartynnik, Ablavatski, Grishchenko & Grundmann (2019). Real-time Facial Surface Geometry from Monocular Video on Mobile GPUs. arXiv:1907.06724. arxiv.org/abs/1907.06724

Related: how bone-level measurements are taken from a photo · methodology · all insights