MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122287370 · doi:10.1109/have.2003.1244730

Dynamic signature verification system using stroked based features

2004· article· en· W2122287370 on OpenAlexaff
Tong Qu, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik, Andy Adler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Signature (topology)Artificial intelligenceProbabilistic logicCorrelationClassifier (UML)Feature (linguistics)Data miningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel feature-based dynamic signature verification system. Data is acquired from a Patriot digital pad, using the Windows Pen API. The signatures are analyzed dynamically by considering their spatial and time domain characteristics. A stroke-based feature extraction method is studied, in which strokes are separated by the zero pressure points. Between each pair of signatures, the correlation comparisons are conducted for strokes. A significant stroke is discriminated by the maximum correlation with respect to the reference signatures. The correlation value and stroke length for the significant strokes are extracted as features for identifying genuine signatures against forgeries. The membership function and classifier are modeled based on the probabilistic distribution of selected features. Experimental results were obtained for signatures from 20 volunteers. The current 6-feature based signature verification system was calculated to have a false accept rate of 1.67% and false reject rate of 6.67%.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207