A Bayesian Approach for Modeling Sensor Influence on Quality, Liveness and Match Score Values in Fingerprint Verification
|
|
- Madlyn Underwood
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 A Bayesian Approach for Modeling Sensor Influence on Quality, Liveness and Match Score Values in Fingerprint Verification Ajita Rattani #1, Norman Poh 2, Arun Ross #3 # Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, Michigan State University, USA 1 ajita@msu.edu 3 rossarun@msu.edu Dept. of Computing, University of Surrey, UK 2 normanpoh@ieee.org Abstract Recently a number of studies in fingerprint verification have combined match scores with quality and liveness measures in order to thwart spoof attacks. However, these approaches do not explicitly account for the influence of the sensor on these variables. In this work, we propose a graphical model that accounts for the impact of the sensor on match scores, quality and liveness measures. The proposed graphical model is implemented using a Gaussian Mixture Model based Bayesian classifier. Effectiveness of the proposed model has been assessed on the LivDet11 fingerprint database using Biometrika and Italdata sensors. I. INTRODUCTION Recent research has highlighted the vulnerability of biometric systems to spoof attacks. A spoof attack occurs when an adversary mimics the biometric trait of another individual in order to circumvent the system. For instance, it has been shown that a person can fool a fingerprint system by using a finger-like object made of gelatin or play-doh that has the fingerprint ridges of another individual impressed on it [1]. In the context of fingerprints, liveness detection algorithms have been proposed as a counter-measure against spoof attacks. These algorithms attempt to discriminate live biometric samples from spoof (fake) artefacts by examining the textural, anatomical and/or physiological attributes of the finger [2], [3]. The output of these liveness detection algorithms is a singlevalued numerical entity referred to as liveness measure. Liveness detection algorithms are not designed to operate in isolation; rather, they have to be integrated with the overall fingerprint recognition system. Accordingly, recent studies have combined match scores generated by a fingerprint matcher with liveness values [4], [5] as well as image quality value [6], in order to render a decision on the recognition process. Typically, a learning-based scheme is used in such a fusion framework [7]. For example, in [4] the authors combine fingerprint match scores with liveness measures using a Bayesian Belief Network. In [6], fingerprint match scores are WIFS 2013, November 18-21, 2013, Guangzhou, China. ISBN c 2013 IEEE. combined with quality and liveness measures using a densitybased fusion framework. The work in [6] also established the benefits of incorporating both image quality and liveness measures in the fusion framework. In [5], face match scores are combined with liveness measures using logistic regression. However, in the aforementioned schemes, the influence of the sensor on the 3 variables - match scores, liveness values and quality - has not been considered. Such a consideration is essential for several reasons: (a) the quality of an image is impacted by the sensor used; (b) most liveness measures are learning-based and are impacted by the sensor that was used to collect live and spoof training data; (c) understanding sensor influence, can help in facilitating sensor interoperability [8] for fingerprint matchers and liveness detectors. In order to address this issue, we propose a fusion framework based on graphical models where the influence of the sensor on match scores, liveness measures and quality values is accounted for. The proposed graphical model is based on the assumption that data from a set of fingerprint sensors are available during the training stage. However, the actual sensor identity is not known during the testing stage 1. The contributions of this work are as follows: (1) development of a graphical model for fusing match scores, liveness measures and quality values while accounting for sensor influence; (2) implementation of the proposed model using a Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) based Bayesian classifier in designing a fingerprint verification system that is robust to zero-effort impostors as well as non-zero-effort spoof attacks; and (3) evaluation of the proposed model using fingerprint data from two different sensors in the LivDet 2011 fingerprint database. This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the proposed graphical model. Section 3 discusses the database and experimental protocol used in this work. Experimental results are reported and discussed in section 4. Conclusions are drawn in section 5. 1 In principal, data from the sensor used during testing does not have to be available during training.
2 II. THE PROPOSED GRAPHICAL MODEL AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION USING GMM Graphical Model Conditional Probabilities A graphical model is an effective tool to express the relationship between different variables [9], [10]. This is often depicted as a directional graph with nodes representing probabilities of a variable and arrows representing conditional probabilities (e.g., an edge from A to B defines P (B A)). We formulate the spoof-resilient fingerprint verification problem as follows. An input fingerprint sample has to be compared against a live 2 template fingerprint sample. Liveness measures and quality values are extracted from both samples. Further, a match score is computed between the two samples. Let y R be the match score, q t R (q i R) represent the quality of the template (input) fingerprint sample (q = [q t, q i ]) and l t R (l i R) denote liveness measure of the template (input) fingerprint sample (l = [l t, l i ]). The output is one of three classes: the genuine class, G, when the input is deemed to be a live sample with the same identity as that of the template; the impostor class, I, when the input is deemed to be a live sample whose identity is not the same as that of the template; the spoof class, S, when the input is not deemed to be a live sample. Let k {G, I, S}. Further, let d signify one of N sensors used for training dataset acquisition. While the set of sensors used for training dataset acquisition is known, the actual sensor used to acquire biometric data during system deployment (or testing) does not have to be known. Table I shows three graphical models and the conditional probabilities between match score (y), quality (q), liveness measure (l) and sensor information (d), conditioned on the class label (k) to represent a) a conventional classifier (Model A); b) a fusion framework based on [6] that combines l, q and y (Model B); and c) the proposed classifier that incorporates the influence of the sensor on l, q and y (Model C). Next, we will explain these graphical models and how they can be realized through a GMM-based Bayesian classifier [7]. a) Conventional classifier: Model A in Table I represents the conventional generative classifier that attempts to model the score (y) conditioned on class label (k {G, I}), i.e., p(y k). A conventional classifier assumes the attacker is simply a zeroeffort impostor (k = I) and does not consider the possibility of concerted spoof attacks. It can be implemented using the log-likelihood ratio based test statistic as follows: ya llr p(y k = G) = log p(y k = I). (1) b) Fusion framework against spoof attacks: Model B in Table I models the joint density of match scores, quality and liveness measures conditioned on class k. This model is based on the framework mentioned in [6] for fingerprint verification against zero-effort impostor and spoof attacks. The joint distribution represented by model B is in the following 2 In this work, the template is assumed to be that of a live fingerprint sample. Its liveness value is nevertheless computed. k y ; p(y k) q y ; p(y q) l y ; p(y l) k y ; p(y k) = p(y k, q, l) d y; p(y d) k y; p(y k) = p(y k, d) d q; p(q d) d l; p(l d) = p(q, l d) TABLE I: Three graphical models that describe the relationship between match scores (y), quality (q), liveness measures (l) and sensor information (d), conditioned on the class label (k). form: p(y, k, q, l) = p(y k, q, l)p(q)p(l)p (k) (2) Model B can be realized using the log-likelihood ratio based test statistic as follows: = log p(y k=g,q,l) p(y k G,q,l) yb llr p(y, q, l k = G) = log p(y, q, l k G), + log p(q k = G) p(q k G) }{{} p(l k = G) + log. p(l k G) }{{} where (k G) {I, S}. The underbraced terms in (3) will be zero as quality (q) and liveness (l) measures are assumed to have no discriminatory information for distinguishing between the genuine and impostor classes. Therefore, the log-ratio for these terms will be zero. Further, p(y k, q, l) cannot be directly estimated using off-the-shelf algorithms. This is because the conditioning variables q and l in (3) are continuous. Alternatively, model B can be effectively realized by the joint density estimate of y, q, l for class k i.e., p(y, q, l k). This method was reported to be more effective than model A (the baseline) (3)
3 under zero-effort impostors as well as spoof attacks in [6], as will also be confirmed by our experiments here. c) Proposed model: Model C in Table I is an extension of model B and models the influence of the sensor. This model attempts to model the dependency of score (y) on class label (k {G, I, S}) as well as the sensor (d). Further, the quality (q) and liveness measures (l) are categorized according to the sensor (d) used in the training dataset. The joint densities represented by model C are as follows: p(y, k, q, l, d) = p(y k, d)p(q, l d)p (d)p (k) (4) Model C can be effectively realized by extending (3) as: y llr c = log d p(y, q, l k = G, d)p (d q) (5) p(y, q, l k G, d)p (d q). d P (d q) in (5) can be estimated using the Bayes rules as: P (d q) = p(q d)p (d). (6) p(q) There is an integration over the sensor (d) in (5) because sensor (d) to be used during the testing (or system deployment) is not known in advance and its probability is inferred from the quality (q) of the operational data i.e., P (d q) in (5). Model C is based on a conjecture that match scores, quality and liveness measures are sensor dependent (d {y, q, l} in model C, Table I(c)). Further, their exists no significant correlation between quality (q) and liveness (l) measures (absence of an arrow between q and l in model C). These conjectures will be validated by empirical evidence (see Section IV). The densities p(y, q, l k) in (3), p(y, q, l k, d) in (5) and p(q d) in (6) to estimate P (d q) in (5) are themselves estimated using the Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM). GMM has been successfully used to estimate joint densities [11]. Let ϕ N (x, µ, Σ) be the N-variate gaussian density with mean vector µ and covariance matrix Σ, i.e., ϕ N (x, µ, Σ) = (2π) N/2 Σ 1/2 exp( 1 2 (x µ)t Σ 1 (x µ)) (7) The estimates of p(x k) (where x is an observation vector which is (y, q, l) in our case) for class k is obtained as a mixture of Gaussians as: M k p(x k) = w k,j ϕ N (x, µ k,j, Σ k,j ) (8) j=1 where M k is the number of mixture components used to model the densities of class k. w k,j is the weight assigned to the j th mixture component in p(x k), M k j=1 w k,j = 1. Selection of the appropriate number of components is one of the most challenging issues in mixture density estimation. The GMM fitting algorithm proposed in [11] automatically estimates the appropriate number of components and the component parameters using an EM algorithm and the minimum message length criterion. Hence, the GMM fitting algorithm proposed in [11] was used in this study 3. III. DATABASE, PROTOCOL AND PERFORMANCE METRICS The LivDet11 dataset was used to evaluate fingerprint liveness detection algorithms submitted to the Second International Competition on Fingerprint Liveness Detection (LivDet11) [12]. It consists of 1000 live and 1000 fake fingerprint images in the training set and the same number of images in the test set. All images collected using the Biometrika and Italdata sensors were used in this study 4. The live images were obtained from 200 different fingers with 5 samples per finger for each set. The fake fingerprints were fabricated using the following five materials: gelatine, silicone, woodglue, ecoflex and latex. 200 fake fingerprints were fabricated per material (200 5 = 1000) from 20 fingers with ten samples per finger for each set (training and testing). The NIST Bozorth3 5 software was used for obtaining a match score between a pair of fingerprint images. The quality of live as well as fake fingerprint impressions was measured using the IQF freeware developed by MITRE 6. The quality factor ranges between 0 and 100, with 0 being the lowest and 100 being the highest quality. Finally, fingerprint liveness was assessed using the liveness measure proposed by Nikam and Aggarwal [3], which is based on Local Binary Pattern (LBP) features. A two class Support Vector Machine (SVM) (implemented using LIBSVM package 7 ) was trained using LBP features extracted from live and fake images in the training set. The output score (probability estimate) of SVM was then used as a liveness measure. Equal Error Rate (EER) using this liveness measure was evaluated to be 10.95% and 18.95% on the test partition of the LivDet11 database for Biometrika and Italdata sensors, respectively. Protocol and Performance metrics: Following the LivDet2011 protocol described in [12], we used 1000 live and 1000 fake images to train the models and the remaining 1000 live and 1000 fake images were used to evaluate the performance of the models. a) Learning-based fusion framework: The observation vector consists of a match score (y) and a pair of quality values (q) as well as liveness measures (l) extracted from a pair of training images - the input and the template. This observation vector is mapped to one of three output classes: G, I, or S (4000 observation vectors were used for each class). This information, i.e., (y, l, q, k) is used to train the GMM-based Bayesian classifiers in model B (3) and model C (5). b) Performance assessment metric: In a spoof-resilient fingerprint verification system, as defined in this work, the G 3 We used the MATLAB code available at mtf/ mixturecode.zip 4 Data from other sensors in the LivDet11 dataset could not be used due to few correspondences in the subject identity between live and fake images cjlin/libsvm/
4 class indicates an Accept while the I and S classes indicate a Reject. Therefore, we define overall false acceptance rate (OF AR) as the proportion of impostor and spoof input samples that are incorrectly classified as being genuine. Genuine Acceptance Rate (GAR) is defined as the proportion of genuine input samples that are correctly classified as such. The False Reject Rate (FRR), which is 1-GAR, denotes the proportion of genuine input samples that are incorrectly classified as being an impostor or a spoof. Overall Equal Error Rate (O-EER) is the rate at which OF AR is equal to F RR. Further, with respect to the impostor class, there is false accept rate of impostor samples (IF AR). With respect to the spoof class, there is false accept rate of spoof samples (SF AR). SF AR (IF AR) is calculated as proportion of spoofed (impostor) samples incorrectly classified as genuine. IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 1) Assessment of model B under same- and cross-sensor operation: First we evaluated the performance of model B under same- and cross-sensor conditions. Figure 1a shows the ROC curves for the performance of model B trained and tested using Biometrika (legend Model-B Bio-Bio ), and that trained using Italdata and tested using Biometrika (legend Model-B Ital-Bio ). Comparative assessment has been made with the baseline (legend Model-A Bio-Bio ) under zeroeffort impostor and spoof attacks. Similarly, Figure 1b shows the performance of model B trained and tested using Italdata (legend Model-B Ital-Ital ), and that trained using Biometrika and tested using Italdata (legend Model-B Bio-Ital ). It can be seen from these Figures that model B, when trained and tested using the same sensor (legend Model-B Bio-Bio in Figure 1a and Model-B Ital-Ital in Figure 1b) can significantly enhance the performance of fingerprint verification under zero-effort impostor as well as spoof attacks by 59.2% and 41.95% over the baseline (legends Model-A Bio-Bio and Model-A Ital- Ital ) for Biometrika and Italdata sensors, respectively. However, the performance of model B significantly degrades on cross-sensor operation. For instance, there is a 65.44% increase in the O-EER of model B that is trained using Italdata and tested using Biometrika (legend Model- B Ital-Bio, Figure 1a) over that trained and tested using Biometrika (legend Model-B Bio-Bio, Figure 1a). Similarly, there is a 58.98% increase in the O-EER of model B that is trained using Biometrika and tested using Italdata (legend Model-B Bio-Ital, Figure 1b) over that trained and tested using Italdata (legend Model-B Ital-Ital, Figure 1b). The degradation in the performance of model B on cross-sensor operation is due to the fact that match scores, quality and liveness measures are impacted by the acquisition sensor used but has not been accounted for. 2) Validation of the conjectures for model C: Model C is based on the conjectures that 1) match scores (y), quality (q) and liveness measures (l) are influenced by the acquisition sensor used (see section II(c)), 2) there exists no significant correlation between quality (q) and liveness measures (l) (a) Model B tested using Biometrika sensor. (b) Model B tested using Italdata sensor. Fig. 1: ROC curves for the matching performance of model B under same- and cross-sensor operating conditions for Biometrika and Italdata sensors. Comparative assessment has been made with model A under zero-effort impostor and spoof attacks. of the fingerprint samples, and 3) quality measures offer discriminatory information to infer the probability of sensor identity, i.e., P (d q) in (5). Figure 2 shows that match score, quality and liveness measures are influenced by the acquisition sensor used. Further, Figure 3 shows the quality (IQF ) and liveness value (LM) of live and fake fingerprint samples of a randomly selected user acquired using Biometrika and Italdata sensors. Scatter plot of liveness measure and quality of the fingerprint samples (Figure 4) acquired using the Biometrika sensor show that no significant correlation (ρ = 0.25) exists between quality (q) and liveness measures (l). A similar observation was made for the Italdata sensor. Note that correlation between q and l may
5 Likelihood Genuine Biometrika Spoof Biometrika Impostor Biometrika Genuine Italdata Spoof Italdata Impostor Italdata Quality Likelihood Biometrika Italdata Scores Biometrika Sensors Italdata Liveness measure Fig. 2: Score distribution, boxplot of quality and likelihood of liveness measures for fingerprint images from the Biometrika and Italdata sensors. It can be seen that scores, quality and liveness measures are sensor dependent (a) Live samples Liveness measures Quality (b) Fake samples Fig. 3: Quality (IQF ) and liveness measure (LM) of live as well as fake fingerprint samples of a subject acquired using Biometrika and Italdata sensors. vary depending upon the dataset and the choice of liveness and quality measurement algorithms. In such cases, model C may derive further advantage on establishing correlation between the two variables. These figures validate the first two conjectures for the graphical model C. Next, we tested the feasibility of estimating the posterior probability of sensors given quality measures, P (d q) (see (5)). In our context, this classifier was built from the density p(q d) using the Bayes rule (see (6)). Equal error rate of the classifier (6) in inferring the actual sensor identity is 8.4% and 5.4% for Biometrika and Italdata sensors, respectively. This suggests the effectiveness of quality (q) values in inferring the actual sensor identity, Fig. 4: Scatter plot between liveness measure and quality of the fingerprint samples acquired using the Biometrika sensor. It can be seen that no significant correlation (ρ = 0.25) exists between the two variables. TABLE II: SFAR, IFAR and O-EER of model B and model C for the Biometrika and Italdata sensors. In all cases, the decision threshold has been set at the O-EER point. Model SFAR[%] IFAR[%] O-EER[%] Model-C Both-Bio Model-B Both-Bio Model-C Both-Ital Model-B Both-Ital therefore reinforcing the influence of the sensor on image quality. 3) Assessment of model C in a multi-sensor environment: In this section, we evaluate the performance of model C. Comparative assessment has been made with model B when trained using information from both the sensors and tested using each sensor individually. In comparison to model C,
6 Fig. 5: ROC Curves for the performance of model C under operation with Biometrika and Italdata sensors. Comparative assessment is made with model B when trained using images from both the sensors. model B does not take into account sensor information when using training data from multiple sensors. Further, model B does not infer the sensor identity during the testing stage. Figure 5 shows the performance of model B and C (when trained using data from both the sensors) for the Biometrika and Italdata sensors. O-EER of model C operating with Biometrika (legend Model-C Both-Bio ) and Italdata sensors (legend Model-C Both-Ital ) is evaluated to be 7.39% and 10.46%, respectively. Further, model B when trained using information from both the sensors and tested on images from Biometrika (legend Model-B Both-Bio ) and Italdata sensors (legend Model-B Both-Ital ) resulted in a performance degradation of 33.4% and 23.14%, respectively, with respect to that of model C. This shows the advantage of Model C over Model B. Further, Figure 5 and Figure 1 indicate that the O-EER of model C (legend Model-C Both-Bio and Model-C Both- Ital, Figure 5) is equivalent to the O-EER of model B trained and tested using the same sensor (legend Model-B Bio-Bio and Model-B Ital-Ital, Figure 1). For instance, the O-EER of model B trained and tested using Biometrika sensor (legend Model-B Bio-Bio in Figure 1) is 7.25% and that of model C tested using Biometrika (legend Model-C Both-Bio in Figure 5) is 7.39%. These observations convey the effectiveness of model C in facilitating operation using multi-sensors during the deployment stage. In Table II, we tabulate SF AR, IF AR and O-EER of model B and model C, when the decision threshold is defined by the O-EER point. It can be seen that Model-C Both-Bio and Model-C Both-Ital obtain reduced SF AR, IF AR and O-EER over Model-B Both-Bio and Model-B Both-Ital, respectively. V. CONCLUSION Recent studies have addressed the security of fingerprint verification systems by combining match scores with quality values and liveness measures in a learning-based fusion framework. We advance the state of the art by modeling sensor influence on these variables. This is realized through a graphical model that accounts for the impact of the sensor on match scores, quality and liveness measures. Experimental investigations on the LivDet11 fingerprint database indicate that a) existing learning-based fusion framework cannot operate effectively in a multi-sensor scenario, and b) the proposed graphical model can effectively operate in a multisensor environment with performance quite comparable to a fusion framework that is trained and tested using images from the same sensor. The effectiveness of the proposed model can be further enhanced by improving the sensitivity of the underlying liveness measure and incorporating user-specific score characteristics for spoof attacks [13]. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Ross was supported by US NSF CAREER Award # IIS Poh was partially supported by Biometrics Evaluation and Testing (BEAT), an EU FP7 project with grant no REFERENCES [1] T. Matsumoto, H. Matsumoto, K. Yamada, and S. Hoshino, Impact of artificial gummy fingers on fingerprint systems, in Proc. of SPIE Opt. Sec. Counterfeit Deterrence Tech. IV, 2002, pp [2] A. Abhyankar and S. Schuckers, Fingerprint liveness detection using local ridge frequencies and multiresolution texture analysis techniques, in Proc. of IEEE Intl. Conf. on Image Processing, Georgia, USA, 2006, pp [3] S. Nikam and S. Aggarwal, Local binary pattern and wavelet-based spoof fingerprint detection, Intl. Journal of Biometrics, vol. 1, no. 2, pp , [4] E. Marasco, Y. Ding, and A. Ross, Combining match scores with liveness values in a fingerprint verification system, in Proc. of IEEE Intl. Conf. on Biometrics: Theory, Applications and Systems (BTAS), Washington, USA, 2012, pp [5] I. Chingovska, A. Anjos, and S. Marcel, Anti-spoofing in action: joint operation with a verification system, in Proc. of IEEE Intl. Workshop on Biometrics (CVPRW), USA, 2013, pp [6] A. Rattani and N. Poh, Biometric system design under zero and nonzero effort attacks, in Proc. of Intl. Conf. on Biometrics (ICB), Madrid, Spain, [7] A. Ross, K. Nandakumar, and A. K. Jain, Handbook of Multibiometrics. Springer Verlag, [8] A. Ross and A. K. Jain, Biometric sensor interoperability: A case study in fingerprints, in Proc. of Intl. ECCV Workshop on Biometric Authentication (BioAW), Prague, Czech Republic, 2004, pp [9] F. Jensen, An Introduction to Bayesian Networks. Springer, [10] N. Poh, J. Kittler, and T. Bourlai, Quality-based score normalization with device qualitative information for multimodal biometric fusion, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part A, vol. 40, no. 3, pp , [11] M. Figueiredo and A. Jain, Unsupervised learning on finite mixture models, IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 24, [12] D. Yambay, L. Ghiani, P. Denti, G. L. Marcialis, F. Roli, and S. Schuckers, Livdet fingerprint liveness detection competition, in Proc. of 5th Intl. Conf. on Biometrics (ICB), Delhi, India, 2012, pp [13] A. Rattani, N. Poh, and A. Ross, Analysis of user-specific score characteristics for spoof biometric attacks, in Proc. of IEEE Computer Society Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW), Providence, USA, 2012, pp
Multimodal Anti-Spoofing in Biometric Recognition Systems
Multimodal Anti-Spoofing in Biometric Recognition Systems Giorgio Fumera, Gian Luca Marcialis, Battista Biggio, Fabio Roli and Stephanie Caswell Schuckers Abstract While multimodal biometric systems were
More informationBIOMET: A Multimodal Biometric Authentication System for Person Identification and Verification using Fingerprint and Face Recognition
BIOMET: A Multimodal Biometric Authentication System for Person Identification and Verification using Fingerprint and Face Recognition Hiren D. Joshi Phd, Dept. of Computer Science Rollwala Computer Centre
More informationA Preliminary Study on Identifying Fabrication Material from Fake Fingerprint Images
2015 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence A Preliminary Study on Identifying Fabrication Material from Fake Fingerprint Images Ajita Rattani 1, Zahid Akhtar 2 and Gian Luca Foresti 2 1 University
More informationGurmeet Kaur 1, Parikshit 2, Dr. Chander Kant 3 1 M.tech Scholar, Assistant Professor 2, 3
Volume 8 Issue 2 March 2017 - Sept 2017 pp. 72-80 available online at www.csjournals.com A Novel Approach to Improve the Biometric Security using Liveness Detection Gurmeet Kaur 1, Parikshit 2, Dr. Chander
More informationAnalysis of User-specific Score Characteristics for Spoof Biometric Attacks
Analysis of User-specific Score Characteristics for Spoof Biometric Attacks Ajita Rattani University of Cagliari Cagliari, Italy ajita.rattani@diee.unica.it Norman Poh University of Surrey Guilford,UK
More informationOutline. Incorporating Biometric Quality In Multi-Biometrics FUSION. Results. Motivation. Image Quality: The FVC Experience
Incorporating Biometric Quality In Multi-Biometrics FUSION QUALITY Julian Fierrez-Aguilar, Javier Ortega-Garcia Biometrics Research Lab. - ATVS Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, SPAIN Loris Nanni, Raffaele
More informationRobustness of Multi-modal Biometric Systems under Realistic Spoof Attacks against All Traits
Robustness of Multi-modal Biometric Systems under Realistic Spoof Attacks against All Traits Zahid Akhtar, Battista Biggio, Giorgio Fumera, and Gian Luca Marcialis Department of Electrical and Electronical
More informationMultimodal Fusion Vulnerability to Non-Zero Effort (Spoof) Imposters
Multimodal Fusion Vulnerability to Non-Zero Effort (Spoof) mposters P. A. Johnson, B. Tan, S. Schuckers 3 ECE Department, Clarkson University Potsdam, NY 3699, USA johnsopa@clarkson.edu tanb@clarkson.edu
More informationRobustness Analysis of Likelihood Ratio Score Fusion Rule for Multimodal Biometric Systems under Spoof Attacks
Robustness Analysis of Likelihood Ratio Score Fusion Rule for Multimodal Biometric Systems under Spoof Attacks Zahid Akhtar, Giorgio Fumera, Gian Luca Marcialis and Fabio Roli Dept. of Electrical and Electronic
More informationSecure Learning Algorithm for Multimodal Biometric Systems against Spoof Attacks
2011 International Conference on Information and etwork Technology IPCSIT vol.4 (2011) (2011) IACSIT Press, Singapore Secure Learning Algorithm for Multimodal Biometric Systems against Spoof Attacks Zahid
More informationFusion in Multibiometric Identification Systems: What about the Missing Data?
Fusion in Multibiometric Identification Systems: What about the Missing Data? Karthik Nandakumar 1, Anil K. Jain 2 and Arun Ross 3 1 Institute for Infocomm Research, A*STAR, Fusionopolis, Singapore, knandakumar@i2r.a-star.edu.sg
More informationAnalysis and Selection of Features for the Fingerprint Vitality Detection
Analysis and Selection of Features for the Fingerprint Vitality Detection Pietro Coli, Gian Luca Marcialis, and Fabio Roli Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering University of Cagliari Piazza
More informationLivDet 2013 Fingerprint Liveness Detection Competition 2013
LivDet 2013 Fingerprint Liveness Detection Competition 2013 Luca Ghiani 1, David Yambay 2, Valerio Mura 1, Simona Tocco 1, Gian Luca Marcialis 1, Fabio Roli 1, Stephanie Schuckers 2 1 University of Cagliari
More informationLivDet 2011 Fingerprint Liveness Detection Competition 2011
LivDet 11 Fingerprint Liveness Detection Competition 11 David Yambay 1, Luca Ghiani 2, Paolo Denti 2, Gian Luca Marcialis 2, Fabio Roli 2, S Schuckers 1 1 Clarkson University - Department of Electrical
More informationExploiting the Doddington Zoo Effect in Biometric Fusion
Exploiting the Doddington Zoo Effect in Biometric Fusion Arun Ross, Ajita Rattani, Massimo Tistarelli Abstract Recent research in biometrics has suggested the existence of the Biometric Menagerie in which
More informationarxiv: v1 [cs.cv] 13 Jan 2019
Generalizing Fingerprint Spoof Detector: Learning a One-Class Classifier Joshua J. Engelsma and Anil K. Jain Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan, USA arxiv:1901.03918v1 [cs.cv] 13 Jan 2019
More informationOnline and Offline Fingerprint Template Update Using Minutiae: An Experimental Comparison
Online and Offline Fingerprint Template Update Using Minutiae: An Experimental Comparison Biagio Freni, Gian Luca Marcialis, and Fabio Roli University of Cagliari Department of Electrical and Electronic
More informationK-Nearest Neighbor Classification Approach for Face and Fingerprint at Feature Level Fusion
K-Nearest Neighbor Classification Approach for Face and Fingerprint at Feature Level Fusion Dhriti PEC University of Technology Chandigarh India Manvjeet Kaur PEC University of Technology Chandigarh India
More informationIncorporating Image Quality in Multi-Algorithm Fingerprint Verification
Incorporating Image Quality in Multi-Algorithm Fingerprint Verification Julian Fierrez-Aguilar 1, Yi Chen 2, Javier Ortega-Garcia 1, and Anil K. Jain 2 1 ATVS, Escuela Politecnica Superior, Universidad
More informationQuality Based Rank-Level Fusion in Multibiometric Systems
Quality Based -Level Fusion in Multibiometric Systems Ayman Abaza and Arun Ross Abstract Multibiometric systems fuse evidences from multiple biometric sources typically resulting in better recognition
More informationKeywords Wavelet decomposition, SIFT, Unibiometrics, Multibiometrics, Histogram Equalization.
Volume 3, Issue 7, July 2013 ISSN: 2277 128X International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Paper Available online at: www.ijarcsse.com Secure and Reliable
More informationRobust multimodal face and fingerprint fusion in the presence of spoofing attacks
Robust multimodal face and fingerprint fusion in the presence of spoofing attacks Article Accepted Version Creative Commons: Attribution Noncommercial No Derivative Works 4.0 Wild, P., Radu, P., Chen,
More informationTHE widespread use of biometric identity recognition
Statistical Meta-Analysis of Presentation Attacks for Secure Multibiometric Systems Battista Biggio, Member, IEEE, Giorgio Fumera, Member, IEEE, Gian Luca Marcialis, Member, IEEE, and Fabio Roli, Fellow,
More informationFusion of Iris and Retina Using Rank-Level Fusion Approach
Fusion of and Using Rank-Level Fusion Approach A. Kavitha Research Scholar PSGR Krishnammal College for Women Bharathiar University Coimbatore Tamilnadu India kavivks@gmail.com N. Radha Assistant Professor
More informationOn the relation between biometric quality and user-dependent score distributions in fingerprint verification
On the relation between biometric quality and user-dependent score distributions in fingerprint verification Fernando Alonso-Fernandez a, Raymond N. J. Veldhuis b, Asker M. Bazen b Julian Fierrez-Aguilar
More informationEFFECTIVE METHODOLOGY FOR DETECTING AND PREVENTING FACE SPOOFING ATTACKS
EFFECTIVE METHODOLOGY FOR DETECTING AND PREVENTING FACE SPOOFING ATTACKS 1 Mr. Kaustubh D.Vishnu, 2 Dr. R.D. Raut, 3 Dr. V. M. Thakare 1,2,3 SGBAU, Amravati,Maharashtra, (India) ABSTRACT Biometric system
More information1.1 Performances of a Biometric System
Performance Analysis of Multimodal Biometric Based Authentication System Mrs.R.Manju, a Mr.A.Rajendran a,dr.a.shajin Narguna b, a Asst.Prof, Department Of EIE,Noorul Islam University, a Lecturer, Department
More informationApproach to Increase Accuracy of Multimodal Biometric System for Feature Level Fusion
Approach to Increase Accuracy of Multimodal Biometric System for Feature Level Fusion Er. Munish Kumar, Er. Prabhjit Singh M-Tech(Scholar) Global Institute of Management and Emerging Technology Assistant
More informationCHAPTER 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
151 CHAPTER 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS In this chapter the performance of the personal identification system on the PolyU database is presented. The database for both Palmprint and Finger Knuckle Print
More informationA Low Cost Incremental Biometric Fusion Strategy for a Handheld Device
A Low Cost Incremental Biometric Fusion Strategy for a Handheld Device Lorene Allano, Sonia Garcia-Salicetti, and Bernadette Dorizzi Telecom & Management SudParis Institut Telecom 9 rue Charles Fourier,
More informationA Novel Approach to Improve the Biometric Security using Liveness Detection
Volume 8, No. 5, May June 2017 International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science RESEARCH PAPER Available Online at www.ijarcs.info ISSN No. 0976-5697 A Novel Approach to Improve the Biometric
More informationClient Dependent GMM-SVM Models for Speaker Verification
Client Dependent GMM-SVM Models for Speaker Verification Quan Le, Samy Bengio IDIAP, P.O. Box 592, CH-1920 Martigny, Switzerland {quan,bengio}@idiap.ch Abstract. Generative Gaussian Mixture Models (GMMs)
More informationUse of Extreme Value Statistics in Modeling Biometric Systems
Use of Extreme Value Statistics in Modeling Biometric Systems Similarity Scores Two types of matching: Genuine sample Imposter sample Matching scores Enrolled sample 0.95 0.32 Probability Density Decision
More informationSECURE MULTIBIOMETRIC SYSTEMS
SECURE MULTIBIOMETRIC SYSTEMS By Emanuela Marasco SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY AT UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES FEDERICO II VIA CLAUDIO 21, 80125 -
More informationAn Intelligent Approach for Anti-Spoofing in a Multimodal Biometric System
An Intelligent Approach for Anti-Spoofing in a Multimodal Biometric System Sukhchain Kaur, Reecha Sharma 2 Department of Electronics and Communication,Punjabi university Patiala,India 2 Department of Electronics
More informationMultimodal Belief Fusion for Face and Ear Biometrics
Intelligent Information Management, 2009, 1, 166-171 doi:10.4236/iim.2009.13024 Published Online December 2009 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/iim) Multimodal Belief Fusion for Face and Ear Biometrics Dakshina
More informationGraph Matching Iris Image Blocks with Local Binary Pattern
Graph Matching Iris Image Blocs with Local Binary Pattern Zhenan Sun, Tieniu Tan, and Xianchao Qiu Center for Biometrics and Security Research, National Laboratory of Pattern Recognition, Institute of
More informationHybrid Biometric Person Authentication Using Face and Voice Features
Paper presented in the Third International Conference, Audio- and Video-Based Biometric Person Authentication AVBPA 2001, Halmstad, Sweden, proceedings pages 348-353, June 2001. Hybrid Biometric Person
More informationPresentations and Attacks, and Spoofs, Oh My Stephanie Schuckers, Clarkson University 2/3/2016
Publishation citation: Schuckers, Stephanie. "Presentations and attacks, and spoofs, oh my." Image and Vision Computing 55 (2016): 26 30. Presentations and Attacks, and Spoofs, Oh My Stephanie Schuckers,
More informationFingerprint verification by decision-level fusion of optical and capacitive sensors
Fingerprint verification by decision-level fusion of optical and capacitive sensors Gian Luca Marcialis and Fabio Roli Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering University of Cagliari Piazza
More informationLatent Fingerprint Matching: Fusion of Rolled and Plain Fingerprints
Latent Fingerprint Matching: Fusion of Rolled and Plain Fingerprints Jianjiang Feng, Soweon Yoon, and Anil K. Jain Department of Computer Science and Engineering Michigan State University {jfeng,yoonsowo,jain}@cse.msu.edu
More information6. Multimodal Biometrics
6. Multimodal Biometrics Multimodal biometrics is based on combination of more than one type of biometric modalities or traits. The most compelling reason to combine different modalities is to improve
More informationFirst International Fingerprint Liveness Detection Competition LivDet 2009 *
First International Fingerprint Liveness Detection Competition LivDet 2009 * Gian Luca Marcialis 1, Aaron Lewicke 2, Bozhao Tan 2, Pietro Coli 1, Dominic Grimberg 2, Alberto Congiu 1, Alessandra Tidu 1,
More informationUtilization of Matching Score Vector Similarity Measures in Biometric Systems
Utilization of Matching Se Vector Similarity Measures in Biometric Systems Xi Cheng, Sergey Tulyakov, and Venu Govindaraju Center for Unified Biometrics and Sensors University at Buffalo, NY, USA xicheng,tulyakov,govind@buffalo.edu
More informationImproving Personal Identification Accuracy Using Multisensor Fusion for Building Access Control Applications
Improving Personal Identification Accuracy Using Multisensor Fusion for Building Access Control Applications Lisa Osadciw, Pramod Varshney, and Kalyan Veeramachaneni laosadci,varshney,kveerama@syr.edu
More informationMultimodal Biometric Authentication using Face and Fingerprint
IJIRST National Conference on Networks, Intelligence and Computing Systems March 2017 Multimodal Biometric Authentication using Face and Fingerprint Gayathri. R 1 Viji. A 2 1 M.E Student 2 Teaching Fellow
More informationRotation Invariant Finger Vein Recognition *
Rotation Invariant Finger Vein Recognition * Shaohua Pang, Yilong Yin **, Gongping Yang, and Yanan Li School of Computer Science and Technology, Shandong University, Jinan, China pangshaohua11271987@126.com,
More informationMultimodal Biometric System by Feature Level Fusion of Palmprint and Fingerprint
Multimodal Biometric System by Feature Level Fusion of Palmprint and Fingerprint Navdeep Bajwa M.Tech (Student) Computer Science GIMET, PTU Regional Center Amritsar, India Er. Gaurav Kumar M.Tech (Supervisor)
More informationEvaluation of Texture Descriptors for Automated Gender Estimation from Fingerprints
Appeared in Proc. of ECCV Workshop on Soft Biometrics, (Zurich, Switzerland), September 2014 Evaluation of Texture Descriptors for Automated Gender Estimation from Fingerprints Ajita Rattani 1, Cunjian
More informationFirst International Fingerprint Liveness Detection Competition LivDet 2009
First International Fingerprint Liveness Detection Competition LivDet 2009 Gian Luca Marcialis 1, Aaron Lewicke 2, Bozhao Tan 2, Pietro Coli 1, Fabio Roli 1, Stephanie Schuckers 2, Dominic Grimberg 2,
More informationUsing Support Vector Machines to Eliminate False Minutiae Matches during Fingerprint Verification
Using Support Vector Machines to Eliminate False Minutiae Matches during Fingerprint Verification Abstract Praveer Mansukhani, Sergey Tulyakov, Venu Govindaraju Center for Unified Biometrics and Sensors
More informationLocal Correlation-based Fingerprint Matching
Local Correlation-based Fingerprint Matching Karthik Nandakumar Department of Computer Science and Engineering Michigan State University, MI 48824, U.S.A. nandakum@cse.msu.edu Anil K. Jain Department of
More informationShape and Texture Based Countermeasure to Protect Face Recognition Systems Against Mask Attacks
2013 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops Shape and Texture Based Countermeasure to Protect Face Recognition Systems Against Mask Attacks Neslihan Kose and Jean-Luc Dugelay
More informationMultimodal Image Fusion Biometric System
International Journal of Engineering Research and Development e-issn : 2278-067X, p-issn : 2278-800X, www.ijerd.com Volume 2, Issue 5 (July 2012), PP. 13-19 Ms. Mary Praveena.S 1, Ms.A.K.Kavitha 2, Dr.IlaVennila
More informationA Multimodal Biometric Identification System Using Finger Knuckle Print and Iris
A Multimodal Biometric Identification System Using Finger Knuckle Print and Iris Sukhdev Singh 1, Dr. Chander Kant 2 Research Scholar, Dept. of Computer Science and Applications, K.U., Kurukshetra, Haryana,
More informationA New Approach to Fake Finger Detection Based on Skin Elasticity Analysis
A New Approach to Fake Finger Detection Based on Skin Elasticity Analysis Jia Jia, Lianhong Cai, Kaifu Zhang, and Dawei Chen Key Laboratory of Pervasive Computing (Tsinghua University), Ministry of Education
More informationFingerprint Liveness Detection Based on Quality Measures
Fingerprint Liveness Detection Based on Quality Measures Javier Galbally, Fernando Alonso-Fernandez, Julian Fierrez, and Javier Ortega-Garcia Biometric Recognition Group ATVS, EPS, Universidad Autonoma
More informationDEFORMABLE MATCHING OF HAND SHAPES FOR USER VERIFICATION. Ani1 K. Jain and Nicolae Duta
DEFORMABLE MATCHING OF HAND SHAPES FOR USER VERIFICATION Ani1 K. Jain and Nicolae Duta Department of Computer Science and Engineering Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824-1026, USA E-mail:
More informationBiometric quality for error suppression
Biometric quality for error suppression Elham Tabassi NIST 22 July 2010 1 outline - Why measure quality? - What is meant by quality? - What are they good for? - What are the challenges in quality computation?
More informationPoisoning Adaptive Biometric Systems
Poisoning Adaptive Biometric Systems Battista Biggio, Giorgio Fumera, Fabio Roli, and Luca Didaci Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Cagliari Piazza d Armi 923, Cagliari,
More informationChapter 6. Multibiometrics
148 Chapter 6 Multibiometrics 149 Chapter 6 Multibiometrics In the previous chapters information integration involved looking for complementary information present in a single biometric trait, namely,
More informationAn Efficient Secure Multimodal Biometric Fusion Using Palmprint and Face Image
International Journal of Computer Science Issues, Vol. 2, 2009 ISSN (Online): 694-0784 ISSN (Print): 694-084 49 An Efficient Secure Multimodal Biometric Fusion Using Palmprint and Face Image Nageshkumar.M,
More informationMultimodal Biometrics Information Fusion for Efficient Recognition using Weighted Method
Multimodal Biometrics Information Fusion for Efficient Recognition using Weighted Method Shalini Verma 1, Dr. R. K. Singh 2 1 M. Tech scholar, KNIT Sultanpur, Uttar Pradesh 2 Professor, Dept. of Electronics
More informationFVC2004: Third Fingerprint Verification Competition
FVC2004: Third Fingerprint Verification Competition D. Maio 1, D. Maltoni 1, R. Cappelli 1, J.L. Wayman 2, A.K. Jain 3 1 Biometric System Lab - DEIS, University of Bologna, via Sacchi 3, 47023 Cesena -
More informationBiometrics already form a significant component of current. Biometrics Systems Under Spoofing Attack
[ Abdenour Hadid, Nicholas Evans, Sébastien Marcel, and Julian Fierrez ] s Systems Under Spoofing Attack [ An evaluation methodology and lessons learned ] istockphoto.com/greyfebruary s already form a
More informationA Coding Scheme for Indexing Multimodal Biometric Databases
A Coding Scheme for Indexing Multimodal Biometric Databases Aglika Gyaourova West Virginia University Morgantown WV 26506, USA agyaouro@csee.wvu.edu Arun Ross West Virginia University Morgantown WV 26506,
More informationFusion of Hand Geometry and Palmprint Biometrics
(Working Paper, Dec. 2003) Fusion of Hand Geometry and Palmprint Biometrics D.C.M. Wong, C. Poon and H.C. Shen * Department of Computer Science, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water
More informationInternational Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering
Volume 3, Issue 2, February 2013 ISSN: 2277 128X International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Paper Available online at: www.ijarcsse.com Level of Fusion
More informationFingerprint Spoof Detection Using Gradient Cooccurrence
Fingerprint Spoof Detection Using Gradient Cooccurrence Matrix Xin Liu and Yujia Jiang Abstract Fingerprint recognition systems have been increasingly deployed in many applications because of its uniqueness
More informationInternational Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering
ISSN: 2277 128X International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Paper Available online at: Fingerprint Recognition using Robust Local Features Madhuri and
More informationA Novel Data Encryption Technique by Genetic Crossover of Robust Finger Print Based Key and Handwritten Signature Key
www.ijcsi.org 209 A Novel Data Encryption Technique by Genetic Crossover of Robust Finger Print Based Key and Handwritten Signature Key Tanmay Bhattacharya 1, Sirshendu Hore 2 and S. R. Bhadra Chaudhuri
More informationFigure 1. Example sample for fabric mask. In the second column, the mask is worn on the face. The picture is taken from [5].
ON THE VULNERABILITY OF FACE RECOGNITION SYSTEMS TO SPOOFING MASK ATTACKS Neslihan Kose, Jean-Luc Dugelay Multimedia Department, EURECOM, Sophia-Antipolis, France {neslihan.kose, jean-luc.dugelay}@eurecom.fr
More informationFingerprint Liveness Detection using Deep Stacking Network
Fingerprint Liveness Detection using Deep Stacking Network Akshata Satish Shet 1 ME Student, Department of Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering, MIT College of Engineering, Kothrud, Pune, India
More informationTime Analysis of Pulse-based Face Anti-Spoofing in Visible and NIR
Time Analysis of Pulse-based Face Anti-Spoofing in Visible and NIR Javier Hernandez-Ortega, Julian Fierrez, Aythami Morales, and Pedro Tome Biometrics and Data Pattern Analytics BiDA Lab Universidad Autónoma
More informationExploring Similarity Measures for Biometric Databases
Exploring Similarity Measures for Biometric Databases Praveer Mansukhani, Venu Govindaraju Center for Unified Biometrics and Sensors (CUBS) University at Buffalo {pdm5, govind}@buffalo.edu Abstract. Currently
More informationFingerprint Indexing using Minutiae and Pore Features
Fingerprint Indexing using Minutiae and Pore Features R. Singh 1, M. Vatsa 1, and A. Noore 2 1 IIIT Delhi, India, {rsingh, mayank}iiitd.ac.in 2 West Virginia University, Morgantown, USA, afzel.noore@mail.wvu.edu
More informationImproving Classifier Fusion via Pool Adjacent Violators Normalization
Improving Classifier Fusion via Pool Adjacent Violators Normalization Gaurav Goswami, Nalini Ratha, Richa Singh, and Mayank Vatsa IIIT-Delhi, India, IBM Research, USA Abstract Classifier fusion is a well-studied
More informationIJMI ACCURATE PERSON RECOGNITION ON COMBINING SIGNATURE AND FINGERPRINT
IJMI ISSN: 0975 2927 & E-ISSN: 0975 9166, Volume 3, Issue 4, 2011, pp-277-281 Available online at http://www.bioinfo.in/contents.php?id=31 ACCURATE PERSON RECOGNITION ON COMBINING SIGNATURE AND FINGERPRINT
More informationDevelopment of Biometrics technology in multimode fusion data in various levels
IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering (IOSR-JCE) e-issn: 2278-0661,p-ISSN: 2278-8727, Volume 19, Issue 5, Ver. III (Sep.- Oct. 2017), PP 01-05 www.iosrjournals.org Development of Biometrics technology in
More informationReal-Time Model-Based Hand Localization for Unsupervised Palmar Image Acquisition
Real-Time Model-Based Hand Localization for Unsupervised Palmar Image Acquisition Ivan Fratric 1, Slobodan Ribaric 1 1 University of Zagreb, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, Unska 3, 10000
More informationRobust biometric image watermarking for fingerprint and face template protection
Robust biometric image watermarking for fingerprint and face template protection Mayank Vatsa 1, Richa Singh 1, Afzel Noore 1a),MaxM.Houck 2, and Keith Morris 2 1 West Virginia University, Morgantown,
More informationFake Biometric System For Fingerprint, Iris, and face using QDA and SIFT
Fake Biometric System For Fingerprint, Iris, and face using QDA and SIFT 1 Gummadidala Ravi Babu, 2 Nagandla Prasad 1 (M.Tech),DECS, Sai Thirumala NVR engineering College, Narasaraopeta, AP, INDIA. 2 Asst
More informationVerifying Fingerprint Match by Local Correlation Methods
Verifying Fingerprint Match by Local Correlation Methods Jiang Li, Sergey Tulyakov and Venu Govindaraju Abstract Most fingerprint matching algorithms are based on finding correspondences between minutiae
More informationOn the Vulnerability of Palm Vein Recognition to Spoofing Attacks
On the Vulnerability of Palm Vein Recognition to Spoofing Attacks Pedro Tome and Sébastien Marcel Idiap Research Institute Centre du Parc, Rue Marconi 9, CH-9 Martigny, Switzerland {pedro.tome, sebastien.marcel}@idiap.ch
More informationFind Pretend Biometric Mistreatment Image Quality Assessment for animateness Detection
161 Find Pretend Biometric Mistreatment Image Quality Assessment for animateness Detection K.Guna Seelan 1, Ms.N.Radhika 2 1 P.G Student, Computer Science Department, Prist University, TamilNadu, India
More informationBiometric Match Score Fusion using RVM: A Case Study in Multi-unit Iris Recognition
Biometric Match Score Fusion using RVM: A Case Study in Multi-unit Iris Recognition Hunny Mehrotra NIT Rourkela, India hunny@nitrkl.ac.in Mayank Vatsa IIIT Delhi, India mayank@iiitd.ac.in Richa Singh IIIT
More informationA Systematic Analysis of Face and Fingerprint Biometric Fusion
113 A Systematic Analysis of Face and Fingerprint Biometric Fusion Sukhchain Kaur 1, Reecha Sharma 2 1 Department of Electronics and Communication, Punjabi university Patiala 2 Department of Electronics
More informationSemi-Fragile Watermarking in Biometric Systems: Template Self-Embedding
Semi-Fragile Watermarking in Biometric Systems: Template Self-Embedding Reinhard Huber 1, Herbert Stögner 1, and Andreas Uhl 1,2 1 School of CEIT, Carinthia University of Applied Sciences, Austria 2 Department
More informationAn Algorithm for Feature Level Fusion in Multimodal Biometric System
An Algorithm for Feature Level Fusion in Multimodal Biometric System 1 S.K.Bhardwaj 1 Research Scholar, Singhania University, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan (India) Abstract The increasing demand for high secure
More informationSpatial Frequency Domain Methods for Face and Iris Recognition
Spatial Frequency Domain Methods for Face and Iris Recognition Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 e-mail: Kumar@ece.cmu.edu Tel.: (412) 268-3026
More informationPerformance Improvement of Phase-Based Correspondence Matching for Palmprint Recognition
Performance Improvement of Phase-Based Correspondence Matching for Palmprint Recognition Vincent Roux Institut Supérieur d électronique de Paris,, rue Notre Dame des Champs, 76 Paris, France vincent.roux@isep.fr
More informationCombining Biometric Scores in Identification Systems
1 Combining Biometric Scores in Identification Systems Sergey Tulyakov and Venu Govindaraju, Fellow, IEEE Both authors are with the State University of New York at Buffalo. 2 Abstract Combination approaches
More informationBiometrics Technology: Hand Geometry
Biometrics Technology: Hand Geometry References: [H1] Gonzeilez, S., Travieso, C.M., Alonso, J.B., and M.A. Ferrer, Automatic biometric identification system by hand geometry, Proceedings of IEEE the 37th
More informationRank-Based Score Normalization for Multi-Biometric Score Fusion
1 Rank-Based Score Normalization for Multi-Biometric Score Fusion Panagiotis Moutafis and Ioannis A. Kakadiaris Computational Biomedicine Lab, Department of Computer Science University of Houston, 4800
More informationDecision Level Fusion of Face and Palmprint Images for User Identification
XI Biennial Conference of the International Biometric Society (Indian Region) on Computational Statistics and Bio-Sciences, March 8-9, 2012 83 Decision Level Fusion of Face and Palmprint Images for User
More informationParallel versus Serial Classifier Combination for Multibiometric Hand-Based Identification
A. Uhl and P. Wild. Parallel versus Serial Classifier Combination for Multibiometric Hand-Based Identification. In M. Tistarelli and M. Nixon, editors, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on
More informationMultimodal Biometric System:- Fusion Of Face And Fingerprint Biometrics At Match Score Fusion Level
Multimodal Biometric System:- Fusion Of Face And Fingerprint Biometrics At Match Score Fusion Level Grace Wangari Mwaura, Prof. Waweru Mwangi, Dr. Calvins Otieno Abstract:- Biometrics has developed to
More informationAn Efficient Model Selection for Gaussian Mixture Model in a Bayesian Framework
IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING LETTERS, VOL. XX, NO. XX, XXX 23 An Efficient Model Selection for Gaussian Mixture Model in a Bayesian Framework Ji Won Yoon arxiv:37.99v [cs.lg] 3 Jul 23 Abstract In order to cluster
More informationON THE ACCURACY AND ROBUSTNESS OF DEEP TRIPLET EMBEDDING FOR FINGERPRINT LIVENESS DETECTION. Federico Pala and Bir Bhanu
ON THE ACCURACY AND ROBUSTNESS OF DEEP TRIPLET EMBEDDING FOR FINGERPRINT LIVENESS DETECTION Federico Pala and Bir Bhanu Center for Research in Intelligent Systems University of California, Riverside, Riverside,
More informationColor Local Texture Features Based Face Recognition
Color Local Texture Features Based Face Recognition Priyanka V. Bankar Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering SKN Sinhgad College of Engineering, Korti, Pandharpur, Maharashtra, India
More information