It ended poorly.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/03/when-beauty-is-in-the-eye-of-the-robobeholder/

Naturally, the problem here is the premise. What is beauty beyond someone else defining it? For as long as humanity’s obsession with the term has existed, we’ve equally known about its subjective nature. After all, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” is merely a cliché that posits that exact subjectivity of attractiveness.

But what if the beholder can eliminate subjectivity—what if the beholder wasn’t a person, but an algorithm? Using machine learning to define beauty could, theoretically, make beauty pageants and rankings like People’s annual Most Beautiful in the World list more objective and less prone to human error. Of course, teaching an algorithm to do anything may involve some bias from whoever does the programming, but that hasn’t stopped this automated approach from defining equally subjective things like listening preferences or news value (we see you, Facebook et al).

the author concludes that So from DaVinci to Wong and Popenko to this, that undeniable human element ultimately permeates results no matter how many layers of technology are added. but i think it's possible that one day AI might evolve to have unique personality and individual differences which could be said to mimic the 'human experience'.

don't really know. interesting article.