Biometric Recognition Based on Free-Text Keystroke Dynamics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate recognition of free text keystroke dynamics is challenging due to the unstructured and sparse nature of the data and its underlying variability. As a result, most of the approaches published in the literature on free text recognition, except for one recent one, have reported extremely high error rates. In this paper, we present a new approach for the free text analysis of keystrokes that combines monograph and digraph analysis, and uses a neural network to predict missing digraphs based on the relation between the monitored keystrokes. Our proposed approach achieves an accuracy level comparable to the best results obtained through related techniques in the literature, while achieving a far lower processing time. Experimental evaluation involving 53 users in a heterogeneous environment yields a false acceptance ratio (FAR) of 0.0152% and a false rejection ratio (FRR) of 4.82%, at an equal error rate (EER) of 2.46%. Our follow-up experiment, in a homogeneous environment with 17 users, yields FAR=0% and FRR=5.01%, at EER=2.13%.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it