Fusion of biometric systems using Boolean combination: an application to iris-based authentication
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
To improve accuracy and reliability, Boolean combination (BC) can efficiently integrate the responses of multiple biometric systems in the ROC space. However, BC techniques assume that recognition systems are conditionally-independent and that their ROC curves are convex. These assumptions are rarely valid in practice, where systems face complex environments, and are designed using limited enrollment data. In recent research, the authors have introduced an Iterative BC (IBC) technique that applies all Boolean functions iteratively, without prior assumptions. In this paper, IBC is considered for fusion of different commercial biometric systems at the decision level. Performance of IBC is assessed for biometric authentication applications in which the operational response of unimodal iris-base systems are combined. Experiments performed with four different commercial systems using anonymised data collected by the Canada Border Services Agency indicate that IBC fusion with interpolation can significantly outperform related BC techniques and individual systems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it