MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120830095 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2006.277291

Person Identification using Electrocardiograms

2006· article· en· W2120830095 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian C.H. Chan, Mohyledin Hamdy, Armin Badre, Vesal Badee

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsLivenessComputer scienceModalRobustness (evolution)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Identification (biology)Speech recognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we demonstrate that the electrocardiogram (ECG) can be used as a biometric. While previous studies have shown the potential of an ECG biometric, this research demonstrates it under conditions that include intra-individual variations and a simple user interface, consisting of electrodes held on the pads of the subject's thumbs. ECG person identification was accomplished through quantitative comparisons of an unknown signal to enrolled signals. The quantitative comparisons were: the correlation coefficient and a wavelet distance measure. It was found that the combination of these two methods provided improved performance, relative to either individual method. ECG person identification accuracy was 90.8%. While this accuracy is relatively low compared to conventional biometrics, such as fingerprints, the ECG can be used as supplementary information for a multi-modal biometric system. A multi-modal system that includes the ECG would have increased accuracy and robustness, without necessarily requiring any change to the perceived user interface. At minimum, the ECG would be useful in providing liveness detection.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations45
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207