I have no doubt that the cuteness of babies is an evolutionary advantage. So the 'why' is clear, a bit of research also explains the mechanics, such as babies having certain features that trigger hormonal reactions. Therefore the 'how' is also fairly clear.
However, this leaves the question for which I did not really find an answer:
Did babies evolve to increasingly trigger cuteness in the brains of adults, or did adult brains evolve to increasingly get attractive to what babies look like?!
In most cases the direction of influence in an evolutionary process is quite clear (e.g. if the sun is bright in an area, humans adapt to it by getting a darker skin, the sun itself did not evolve to become brighter in area's where people with darker skin live).
However, as the appearance etc. of babies and how these are percieved is actually both about humans (who typically are first babies and then become parents) I am now doubting if babies are evolving to be cute, or if cuteness is evolving to match babies!
I am very curious if we know if the evolutionary influence is a one way street, bidirectional, or perhaps we (recognized scientists) actually have concluded that we have no idea. In case it was not clear I am mostly interested in humans though I guess the question may apply to other races as well.
I did think about other things that are typically found to be cute by humans (e.g. baby animals), but these roughly have the same features that we currently find cute in human babies (e.g. being small) so I don't think this rules out an influence in either direction.
My personal intuition is that babies will definitely evolve towards the general current standard of cuteness, but I would not be surprised if the standard of cuteness also evolves towards the general current appearance of babies.