## 1 Introduction  
Human identification is one of the essential elements of forensic practice and investigation. This is optimally achieved through a close collaboration between forensic medicine, anthropology, and the judicial process; this collaboration needs to be materialized in laboratory methods (forensic, anthropological, genetic, craniofacial reconstruction) as well as in investigative methods (crime scene research, reconstitution, fingerprint, identification of personal objects, etc.). Human identification uses anthropological and laboratory methods in order to establish the identity of human remains, one of which is the reconstruction of the facial aspect from the skull. In forensic practice, the skull helps perform several roles: establishing the subject's identity, reflecting the age of the subject, indicating sex as well as facial appearances [1]. Therefore, facial reconstruction depicts individual facial characteristics in order to help identify the person. In the facial reconstruction theory, all faces are unique, and the shape variation of the face is directly related to skeletal structure [2; 3; 4; 5]. Human identification through facial appearance has preoccupied society for hundreds of years. The earliest example is the work of [PERSON] (1853-1914), a Parisian anthropologist who developed a system for recording detailed facial characteristics that could later be used for identification. Another pioneer was [PERSON] (1907-1970), a Russian academic who carried out research relating to the morphology of the face and skull [4]. Facial analysis includes three methods: morphological--comparison of facial characteristics in terms of shape and facial type; proportional--comparison of facial characteristics in terms of size and distance between certain skull points; anthropometrical--comparison of measurements of the face and skull [6]. The anatomical relationship between soft and hard tissue can be established by means of radiological data--X-ray, computer tomography, nuclear magnetic resonance, etc. There are a number of recent publications that provide different imaging modalities for establishing the facial soft tissue thicknesses specific to different populations [7; 8; 9; 10]. At an international level there is vast literature and research regarding this relationship as well as for the necessary parameters relating to craniofacial reconstruction. Thus, most countries (France, Brazil, Portugal, China, etc.) have conducted and are conducting numerous studies to develop methods for craniofacial reconstruction (based on computer-tomography images, cadavers, ultrasonography, etc.) and to establish the necessary correlations between bone and soft tissue specific to each population [11; 12; 13; 14; 15]. Facial reconstruction methods use two important facial elements (nose and mouth), which define the aspect of the face and contribute to a higher accuracy of the reconstructed physiognomy. Therefore, in reconstructing these elements, multiple studies which are related to multiple prediction methods, are necessary for correctly establishing the relation between the hard tissue and soft tissue. In this sense, as we mentioned before, a lot of countries are developing their own database with these correlations. One study, which developed such correlations for all populations, was done by [PERSON] and [PERSON]. The study revealed the relation between hard and soft tissue of the nose; in this sense the authors developed regression formulas based on aperture dimensions and nasal craniometric points [16]. Despite all these aspects, the Romanian population does not have any data on the relationship between soft and hard tissues in order to allow craniofacial reconstruction, as well as no data relating to the relationship between these tissues for the morphology of the nose. This data will allow, first of all, the alignment at an international standard of the forensic identification process, and secondly will help the development of research in forensics.