MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997960409 · doi:10.5539/mas.v9n1p137

About One Method of On-Line Signature Verification Using Radial Basis Function

2014· article· en· W1997960409 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
E.S. Anisimova, Rinat R. Ibatullin

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSignature (topology)Basis (linear algebra)WaveletFunction (biology)Radial basis functionInvariant (physics)AlgorithmMagnitude (astronomy)Basis functionWavelet transformLine (geometry)Representation (politics)Computer sciencePosition (finance)MathematicsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligencePhysicsGeometryArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is devoted to the study of a possibility of on-line signature verification using the wavelet transform with the radial basis function. Representation of the signature in the form of function, invariant concerning a position, – the signature is replaced by a broken curve and is described using the angles between the adjacent links – is offered. Using the wavelet transforms for the signature description, comparison of expansion coefficients of functions of signatures by the radial basis function to verify signatures is described in detail. In the result of application of the offered method the magnitude of error of first kind has made 4.4%, the magnitude of error of second kind – 2.8%.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207