Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Mamba-CNN: A Hybrid Architecture for Efficient and Accurate Facial Beauty Prediction

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A CNN block with Mamba-inspired gating raises the top score on facial beauty prediction.

desk verdict The SOTA claim is unverifiable as reported, and the 'Mamba' block is really a depthwise conv plus sigmoid gate, but the paper is honest, the ablation is coherent, and the result is worth refereeing if the author releases code and per-fold numbers. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.01431 v1 pith:72Z543YF submitted 2025-09-01 cs.CV

Djamel Eddine Boukhari This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords facialbeautypredictionMambastatespacemodelshybridCNNarchitectureselectivegatingSCUT-FBP5500multi-scalefeaturepyramidattractivenessregression
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes Mamba-CNN, a hybrid architecture for facial beauty prediction that grafts a Mamba-inspired selective gating mechanism onto a convolutional backbone. The gate multiplies the main feature path by the output of a depthwise-conv-plus-sigmoid branch, letting the network amplify cues it deems relevant to attractiveness while suppressing background clutter, without the quadratic cost of full attention. On the SCUT-FBP5500 benchmark, Mamba-CNN reports a Pearson correlation of 0.9187, a mean absolute error of 0.2022, and a root mean square error of 0.2610, which the paper argues sets a new state of the art across all three metrics. An ablation attributes the largest gain to the gating branch and a smaller additive gain to a multi-scale feature pyramid, supporting the paper's thesis that content-aware selective modulation is a promising replacement for global attention in nuanced visual regression tasks.

What carries the argument

The MambaBlock is the core building block: an inverted residual structure that first expands channels with a 1x1 convolution, applies a 3x3 depthwise convolution, and then modulates the result with a parallel gating branch made of another 3x3 depthwise convolution plus a sigmoid activation. The element-wise multiplication of gate and main path gives the network input-dependent, spatially selective re-weighting. A multi-scale feature pyramid—adaptive average pooling to 1x1, 2x2, and 4x4, followed by concatenation—feeds multi-resolution context into a fully connected regression head. The residual skip connection (when dimensions match) and the inverted residual design keep training stable, whi

What would settle it

Retrain Mamba-CNN and R3CNN on the exact same split of SCUT-FBP5500 with identical preprocessing and denormalization; if the Pearson correlation gap shrinks to under about 0.002 or the reported numbers do not reproduce, the claimed state-of-the-art result would not hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a simplified, content-aware gating path—a 3x3 depthwise convolution followed by a sigmoid, multiplied element-wise onto the main feature stream—captures much of the benefit of global attention for facial beauty regression. Inserted into an inverted residual block (expand, depthwise, gated multiply, project, residual skip), this 'MambaBlock' lets the network apply a spatially varying gain to its own features. Combined with a multi-scale feature pyramid that pools at 1x1, 2x2, and 4x4 and concatenates the results before a fully connected head, the architecture yields the reported metrics. The paper's ablation shows the gate alone raises Pearson correlation from 0.

Load-bearing premise

The state-of-the-art claim assumes that every baseline in Table 1 was evaluated with the same train/test split, preprocessing, and score denormalization as Mamba-CNN, but the paper never specifies those protocol details.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the reported numbers reproduce, Mamba-CNN becomes the top-performing model on SCUT-FBP5500 on all three standard metrics, surpassing R3CNN (PC 0.9187 vs 0.9142, MAE 0.2022 vs 0.2120, RMSE 0.2610 vs 0.2800).
  • The large ablation gain from the gating branch (PC +0.0105) indicates that selective spatial re-weighting, not just deeper or wider convolutions, drives the improvement.
  • The architecture's linear-complexity gate makes it a practical candidate for high-resolution facial images and real-time beauty-scoring applications where quadratic attention is too costly.
  • The hybrid CNN+SSM design principle, if it generalizes, offers a template for other fine-grained regression tasks that need both local texture and global configuration.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the 'Mamba' in MambaBlock is only a sigmoid gate and does not actually run a selective scan or state-space parameterization, the paper's success would suggest that for FBP the essential ingredient is content-dependent feature gain, not long-range mixing; a true 2D SSM might add little on this benchmark.
  • The paper reports no parameter count, FLOPs, or training-time comparison; if the model is as compact as the MobileNetV2-style design suggests, it would strengthen the claim that it is 'efficient' relative to ViTs.
  • A natural testable extension: replace the fixed adaptive-average pooling scales with a learned multi-scale attention fusion, which might further improve PC beyond 0.9187.
  • The dependence on a single dataset means the gating benefit could be an artifact of SCUT-FBP5500's particular label distribution; cross-dataset validation on more diverse face sets would clarify that.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Mamba-CNN, a hybrid architecture for facial beauty prediction on the SCUT-FBP5500 benchmark. The network combines a hierarchical CNN backbone of inverted-residual-style MambaBlocks—where each block uses a depthwise convolution followed by sigmoid as an 'SSM-inspired' gate—with a multi-scale feature pyramid and a fully connected regression head. Training uses MSE loss, AdamW, augmentation, and early stopping. The paper claims state-of-the-art results (PC 0.9187, MAE 0.2022, RMSE 0.2610) and presents an ablation showing that both the gating mechanism and the feature pyramid contribute to performance.

Significance. If the reported results are reproducible under the same evaluation protocol as the cited baselines, Mamba-CNN would be a competitive hybrid model for facial beauty prediction, with an internally consistent ablation (§3.4) and a clearly described training procedure (Algorithm 1). The external SCUT-FBP5500 benchmark and external baselines mean the central performance claim is not circular. However, the SOTA claim is only as strong as the protocol transparency behind Table 1. The paper provides no code, per-fold results, or statistical uncertainty estimates, and the margin over R3CNN is small (PC +0.0045). Moreover, the paper openly states in §4.1 that the MambaBlock is a simplified gating mechanism without the selective scan, state-space parameterization, or discretization of Mamba, so the 'global context' and 'new architectural paradigm' claims are not supported by the described mechanism.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2.1, §2.5, Table 1] The SOTA claim in the Abstract and §3.2 depends on the numbers in Table 1 being produced under the same evaluation protocol as the baselines. Section 2.1 only says the model 'adheres to the dataset’s prescribed cross-validation split,' and §2.5 says metrics are computed after denormalization, but the paper never states which split or fold is used, whether metrics are averaged over folds, how the validation set for early stopping (Algorithm 1) is carved from training data, or how the Table 1 baselines, especially R3CNN, were evaluated. Since the margin over R3CNN is small, a different split or normalization convention could change the ranking. Please specify the exact split, report per-fold results, and provide an evaluation script or enough protocol detail to make the comparison checkable.
  2. [§3.2, Table 1] No uncertainty estimates or repeated-run statistics are reported. The comparison is based on single numbers for each model. For example, the PC improvement over R3CNN is 0.9187 versus 0.9142, a difference of 0.0045; without error bars or per-fold results, it is not possible to assess whether this difference is significant. Report mean and standard deviation over multiple runs, or at least per-fold numbers, and state whether early stopping is applied independently per run.
  3. [§2.3, §4.1] The MambaBlock as described is an inverted residual block whose 'SSM-inspired gating' branch is a 3x3 depthwise convolution followed by a sigmoid. The paper itself concedes in §4.1 that it 'does not incorporate the full complexity of the selective scan mechanism found in the original Mamba architecture, such as its state-space parameterization and discretization.' Therefore the Abstract's claims that the model 'mod[s] global context' and captures 'long-range spatial relationships' are not established by the described mechanism, which has only a local 3x3 receptive field. The empirical results may still be valid, but the architectural framing and the 'new architectural paradigm' claim in §5 need to be scaled back unless a global-context analysis is provided.
  4. [Title, §1, §3.1] The title and the motivation emphasize efficiency, but the paper reports no parameter counts, FLOPs/MACs, or inference-time comparison against the baseline CNNs or ViTs. Since the efficiency-versus-accuracy trade-off is the stated motivation (Abstract, §1), the reader cannot verify that Mamba-CNN is more efficient than a standard CNN or less costly than a ViT. Add a complexity table (parameters, MACs, throughput) or remove the efficiency claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2.1] The normalization description says the original minimum and maximum scores were stored for denormalization, but Algorithm 1 and the evaluation protocol do not mention this step explicitly. Please clarify where and how denormalization is performed.
  2. [Table 1] Add a column describing the evaluation protocol used for each baseline (split, input size, and any normalization), so that the reader can see that all methods are compared on equal terms. Also include the source or footnote for each baseline number.
  3. [§2.5] The Pearson correlation formula is mis-rendered; the square root sign should cover the product of the two sums. Please fix the notation.
  4. [References] Reference [30] (R3CNN) is incomplete: it lacks volume/article number and page range. Some other references also have inconsistent formatting; please check them against the journal style.
  5. [Figure 2] The label 'SSM Gating (DW-Conv + Sigmoid)' is misleading because the component is not an SSM. Consider renaming it to 'gating branch' or 'Mamba-inspired gating' consistently with §4.1.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reported SOTA is an external benchmark comparison, not a derivation from the paper's own inputs.

full rationale

The central claim—Mamba-CNN achieving PC 0.9187, MAE 0.2022, and RMSE 0.2610 and setting a new state-of-the-art on SCUT-FBP5500—is an empirical result obtained by training on an external benchmark and comparing against externally published baselines in Table 1. There is no fitted parameter that is later renamed as a prediction; the metrics are measured on the test set after denormalization, and the ablation study in Table 2 compares model variants under the same protocol. The architecture is not derived from a theorem; it is a proposed design whose performance is evaluated, not logically entailed. The paper does cite the author's own prior FBP work (e.g., [3], [4], [9], [10], [16], [18], [22], [25]), but those citations provide context and framing, not the load-bearing evidence for the SOTA claim. The §4.1 admission that the MambaBlock is 'a simplified, SSM-inspired gating mechanism' without the full selective-scan machinery is a novelty-scope caveat, not a circular step: it does not make the benchmark results equivalent to the paper's inputs. The absence of split/protocol details is a reproducibility concern, but it is not circularity. Therefore no circular step is identifiable.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model itself is a fitted regressor, so all reported performance is contingent on the benchmark remaining an accepted test. The paper also relies on hand-set hyperparameters and on the unproven identity of a depthwise conv plus sigmoid with 'Mamba-inspired' selectivity. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (6)
  • network channel widths = 64, 128, 256, 512
    Chosen by hand in Figure 1; not justified by search or scaling law.
  • inverted residual expansion factor = not reported
    Controls the width of the expanded representation in each MambaBlock; omitted from the paper.
  • feature pyramid pooling sizes = 1x1, 2x2, 4x4
    Hand-selected spatial scales for multi-scale aggregation.
  • learning rate = 1e-4
    Fixed without reported tuning or search.
  • weight decay = 1e-5
    Fixed without reported tuning.
  • batch size = 32
    Fixed by GPU memory and chosen without sensitivity analysis.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption SCUT-FBP5500 mean human ratings are a valid regression target for facial beauty.
    The mean of 60 annotators is treated as objective ground truth; the paper acknowledges subjectivity and bias in Section 4.1.
  • ad hoc to paper A depthwise convolution followed by sigmoid constitutes a Mamba or SSM-inspired selective mechanism.
    No state space parameterization, discretization, or selective scan appears in Section 2.3; Section 4.1 admits the mechanism is simplified.
  • domain assumption All baselines in Table 1 were evaluated under the same split and preprocessing protocol.
    The paper asserts use of the prescribed cross-validation split but gives no fold-level details for itself or the baselines.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mamba-CNN: A Hybrid Architecture for Efficient and Accurate Facial Beauty Prediction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/72Z543YF

@misc{pith2026250901431,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mamba-CNN: A Hybrid Architecture for Efficient and Accurate Facial Beauty Prediction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/72Z543YF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.01431}
}
read the original abstract

The computational assessment of facial attractiveness, a challenging subjective regression task, is dominated by architectures with a critical trade-off: Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) offer efficiency but have limited receptive fields, while Vision Transformers (ViTs) model global context at a quadratic computational cost. To address this, we propose Mamba-CNN, a novel and efficient hybrid architecture. Mamba-CNN integrates a lightweight, Mamba-inspired State Space Model (SSM) gating mechanism into a hierarchical convolutional backbone. This core innovation allows the network to dynamically modulate feature maps and selectively emphasize salient facial features and their long-range spatial relationships, mirroring human holistic perception while maintaining computational efficiency. We conducted extensive experiments on the widely-used SCUT-FBP5500 benchmark, where our model sets a new state-of-the-art. Mamba-CNN achieves a Pearson Correlation (PC) of 0.9187, a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 0.2022, and a Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of 0.2610. Our findings validate the synergistic potential of combining CNNs with selective SSMs and present a powerful new architectural paradigm for nuanced visual understanding tasks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.01431 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overall architecture of the proposed Mamba-CNN model. It features a hierarchical structure with stacked [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Detailed architecture of the MambaBlock. It features an inverted residual structure with a parallel SSM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Scale-interaction transformer: a hybrid cnn-transformer model for facial beauty prediction

    cs.CV 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A network that feeds three pooled multi-scale CNN features through a two-block transformer reaches PC 0.9187 on SCUT-FBP5500, edging out the cited R3CNN baseline.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Zhang, F

    D. Zhang, F. Chen, and Y . Xu, Computer Models for Facial Beauty Analysis, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2016

    2016

  2. [2]

    Ranking facial attractiveness,

    H. Knight and O. Keith, “Ranking facial attractiveness,” The European Journal of Orthodontics, vol. 27, no. 4 pp. 340-348, 2005

    2005

  3. [3]

    A comprehensive review of facial beauty prediction using deep learning techniques

    Djamel Eddine Boukhari,et al. "A comprehensive review of facial beauty prediction using deep learning techniques." Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 161 (2025): 112009. 11 A PREPRINT - SEPTEMBER 3, 2025

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    D. E. Boukhari, A. Chemsa, R. Ajgou, et al., An Ensemble of Deep Convolutional Neural Networks Models for Facial Beauty Prediction, Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, vol. 27 no

  5. [5]

    EEE Access, vol

    J Gan, L Xiang, Y Zhai, et al., 2M BeautyNet: Facial beauty prediction based on multi-task transfer learning. EEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 20245-20256, 2020

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Transfer learning adaptive facial attractiveness assessment

    I Lebedeva,Y Guo and F Ying. Transfer learning adaptive facial attractiveness assessment. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. vol. 1922, no. 1, 2021

    1922

  7. [7]

    The role of the golden proportion in the evaluation of facial esthetics

    Rossetti, Alberto, et al. "The role of the golden proportion in the evaluation of facial esthetics." The Angle Orthodontist 83.5 (2013): 801-808

    2013

  8. [8]

    Computation of a face attractiveness index based on neoclassical canons, symmetry, and golden ratios

    Schmid, Kendra, David Marx, and Ashok Samal. "Computation of a face attractiveness index based on neoclassical canons, symmetry, and golden ratios." Pattern Recognition 41.8 (2008): 2710-2717

    2008

Show all 30 references
  1. [9]

    Facial Beauty Prediction Using an Ensemble of Deep Convolutional Neural Networks

    Djamel Eddine Boukhari, et al. "Facial Beauty Prediction Using an Ensemble of Deep Convolutional Neural Networks." Engineering Proceedings 56.1 (2023): 125

    2023

  2. [10]

    SCAT: The Self-Correcting Aesthetic Transformer for Explainable Facial Beauty Prediction

    Boukhari, Djamel Eddine, and Ali Chemsa. "SCAT: The Self-Correcting Aesthetic Transformer for Explainable Facial Beauty Prediction." (2025)

    2025

  3. [11]

    Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks

    Krizhevsky, Alex, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey E. Hinton. "Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks." Advances in neural information processing systems 25 (2012)

    2012

  4. [12]

    Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition

    Simonyan, Karen, and Andrew Zisserman. "Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition." arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556 (2014)

    2014 arXiv

  5. [13]

    K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren et al., Deep residual learning for image recognition. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Las Vegas, NV , USA, pp. 770-778, 2016

    2016

  6. [14]

    IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Hong Kong, China, pp

    D Xie, L Liang, L Jin, et al., Scut-fbp: A benchmark dataset for facial beauty perception. IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Hong Kong, China, pp. 1821-1826, 2015

    2015

  7. [15]

    An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale

    Dosovitskiy, Alexey, et al. "An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale." arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929 (2020)

    2010 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Facial Beauty Prediction Based on Vision Transformer

    Djamel Eddine Boukhari, Ali Chemsa, and Riadh Ajgou. "Facial Beauty Prediction Based on Vision Transformer." International Journal of Electrical and Electronic Engineering and Telecommunications, ISSN (2023): 2319-2518

    2023

  9. [17]

    Vision transformers for image classification: A comparative survey

    Wang, Yaoli, et al. "Vision transformers for image classification: A comparative survey." Technologies 13.1 (2025): 32

    2025

  10. [18]

    Facial Beauty Prediction Using Global Context Vision Transformer,

    D. Eddine Boukhari, A. Chemsa and Z. -E. Baarir, "Facial Beauty Prediction Using Global Context Vision Transformer," 2025 International Symposium on iNnovative Informatics of Biskra (ISNIB), Biskra, Algeria, 2025

    2025

  11. [19]

    Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces

    Gu, Albert, and Tri Dao. "Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces." arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.00752 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    A survey on visual mamba

    Zhang, Hanwei, et al. "A survey on visual mamba." Applied Sciences 14.13 (2024): 5683

    2024

  13. [21]

    Liang, L

    L. Liang, L. Lin, L. Jin et al., SCUT-FBP5500: A diverse benchmark dataset for multi-paradigm facial beauty prediction. 24th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), Beijing, China, pp. 1598-1603, 2018

    2018

  14. [22]

    An Uncertainty-Aware and Explainable Deep Learning Model for Facial Beauty Prediction

    Boukhari, Djamel Eddine, and Ali Chemsa. "An Uncertainty-Aware and Explainable Deep Learning Model for Facial Beauty Prediction." (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    Personalized facial beauty assessment: a meta-learning approach

    I Lebedeva, F Ying, and Y Guo. Personalized facial beauty assessment: a meta-learning approach. The Visual Computer: International Journal of Computer Graphics, V ol. 39, no. 3,pp. 1095–1107, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Fixing weight decay regularization in adam

    Loshchilov, Ilya, and Frank Hutter. "Fixing weight decay regularization in adam." arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101 5 (2017): 5

    2017 arXiv

  17. [25]

    MobileViT architecture for Facial Beauty Prediction

    Djamel Eddine Boukhari, Ali Chemsa, and Zine-Eddine Baarir. "MobileViT architecture for Facial Beauty Prediction." 2024 International Conference on Telecommunications and Intelligent Systems (ICTIS). IEEE, 2024

    2024

  18. [26]

    Improving Facial Attractiveness Prediction via Co-attention Learning,

    S. Shi, F. Gao, X. Meng, et al., "Improving Facial Attractiveness Prediction via Co-attention Learning," IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Brighton, UK, pp. 4045-4049, 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    Cao, K Choi, H Jung et al., Deep learning for facial beauty prediction

    K. Cao, K Choi, H Jung et al., Deep learning for facial beauty prediction. Information, vol. 11, no. 8, 2020

    2020

  20. [28]

    Label distribution-based facial attractiveness computation by deep residual learning

    Fan, Yang-Yu, et al. "Label distribution-based facial attractiveness computation by deep residual learning." IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 20.8 (2017): 2196-2208. 12 A PREPRINT - SEPTEMBER 3, 2025

    2017

  21. [29]

    Dynamic attentive convolution for facial beauty prediction

    Sun, Zhishu, et al. "Dynamic attentive convolution for facial beauty prediction." IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information and Systems 107.2 (2024): 239-243

    2024

  22. [30]

    Regression Guided by Relative Ranking Using Convolutional Neural Network (R3CNN) for Facial Beauty Prediction

    Lin, L.; Liang, L.; Jin, L. Regression Guided by Relative Ranking Using Convolutional Neural Network (R3CNN) for Facial Beauty Prediction. IEEE Trans. Affect. Comput. 2019, 1. . 13

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.