MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W11477303 · doi:10.1201/9781315220444

Biometric Inverse Problems

2018· book· en· W11477303 on OpenAlexaff
Svetlana Yanushkevich, Adrian Stoica, Vlad P. Shmerko, Denis V. Popel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBiometric Identification and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsComputer scienceFingerprint (computing)Artificial intelligenceOrientation (vector space)Iris recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional methods of biometric analysis are unable to overcome the limitations of existing approaches, mainly due to the lack of standards for input data, privacy concerns involving use and storage of actual biometric data, and unacceptable accuracy. Exploring solutions to inverse problems in biometrics transcends such limits and allows rich analysis of biometric information and systems for improved performance and testing. Although some particular inverse problems appear in the literature, until now there has been no comprehensive reference for these problems.Biometric Inverse Problems provides the first comprehensive treatment of biometric data synthesis and modeling. This groundbreaking reference comprises eight self-contained chapters that cover the principles of biometric inverse problems; basics of data structure design; new automatic synthetic signature, fingerprint, and iris design; synthetic faces and DNA; and new tools for biometrics based on Voronoi diagrams. Based on the authors' vast experience in the field, the book authoritatively examines new approaches and methodologies in both direct and inverse biometrics, providing invaluable analytical and benchmarking tools. The authors include case studies, examples, and implementation codes for practical illustration of the methods.Loaded with approximately 200 figures, 60 problems, 50 MATLAB® code fragments, and 200 examples, Biometric Inverse Problems sets the standard for innovation and authority in biometric data synthesis, modeling, and analysis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.016

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiometric Identification and SecurityFrench-language works237,207