IMPROVEMENT OF IRIS RECOGNITION PERFORMANCE USING REGION-BASED ACTIVE CONTOURS, GENETIC ALGORITHMS AND SVMs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most existing iris recognition algorithms focus on the processing and recognition of the ideal iris images that are acquired in a controlled environment. In this paper, we process the nonideal iris images that are captured in an unconstrained situation and are affected severely by gaze deviation, eyelids and eyelashes occlusions, nonuniform intensity, motion blur, reflections, etc. The proposed iris recognition algorithm has three novelties as compared to the previous works; firstly, we deploy a region-based active contour model to segment a nonideal iris image with intensity inhomogeneity; secondly, genetic algorithms (GAs) are deployed to select the subset of informative texture features without compromising the recognition accuracy; Thirdly, to speed up the matching process and to control the misclassification error, we apply a combined approach called the adaptive asymmetrical support vector machines (AASVMs). The verification and identification performance of the proposed scheme is validated on three challenging iris image datasets, namely, the ICE 2005, the WVU Nonideal, and the UBIRIS Version 1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".