MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161584590 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2006.1660861

Keystroke Identification Based on Gaussian Mixture Models

2006· article· en· W2161584590 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeystroke dynamicsPasswordKeystroke loggingComputer scienceBiometricsLoginIdentification (biology)Authentication (law)Mixture modelHuman–computer interactionComputer securityArtificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionS/KEY

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many computer systems rely on the username and password model to authenticate users. This method is widely used, yet it can be highly insecure if a user's login information has been compromised. To increase security, some authors have proposed keystroke patterns as a biometric tool for user authentication; they can be used to recognize users based on how they type. This paper introduces a novel method that applies GMMs to keystroke identification. The major benefit of this method is the ability to update the user's model each time he or she is authenticated. Therefore, as time goes on, each user model accurately reflects the changes in that user's keystroke pattern. Using this method, a FAR and a FRR rate of approximately 2% was achieved. However, it should be noted that 50% of the test subjects were the traditional "two finger" typists and therefore, this had a disproportionately negative impact on the results

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207