The number needs a definition
A score of 90 does not have a universal meaning. One engine may use a different range, threshold or model from another. A number can order results usefully without describing how often those results are correct. FaceCheck’s FAQ provides its own score terminology; that should not be silently converted into a general confidence percentage.
A meaningful accuracy claim also needs a test population, image conditions, a definition of a correct result and a false-positive rate. A headline without those details is difficult to evaluate. A demonstration showing one successful search cannot fill the gap.
Check the picture and the source separately
First ask whether the images share distinctive features or merely a broad resemblance. Then ask whether the source page explicitly connects its caption, name or account to that image. A photograph embedded beside an article does not necessarily depict the writer or the person discussed.
When two sources disagree, preserve the disagreement. Do not combine a name from one, a location from another and a lookalike from a third into a new profile. That creates a claim none of the sources made.
Common reasons to withhold a conclusion
- Poor input. Obstructions, low resolution or a steep angle make comparison harder.
- Lookalikes. Similar appearance can produce an appealing but incorrect candidate.
- Old context. A source page can be outdated or the image reused.
- Missing coverage. The relevant picture may not be in the index at all.
- Test output. A restricted demonstration index is not suitable for identity conclusions.
The last point applies directly to Facehunch’s current FaceCheck mode. We label the output as test results and do not produce identity biographies or background reports from it.
Use a stopping rule
Before searching, decide what evidence would actually resolve your question. Finding an image on your own archived portfolio might confirm reuse. Finding a vaguely similar person does not. If the only support is the model score, mark the candidate unverified and stop short of an identity claim.
For a high-stakes decision about someone, use a suitable authorised verification process instead of a photo match. Read background checks versus photo search for the distinction.