MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166857861 · doi:10.1109/cib.2009.4925689

A facial presence monitoring system for information security

2009· article· en· W2166857861 on OpenAlexafffund
Qinghan Xiao, Xue Yang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaDefence Research and Development Canada
FundersDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceEigenfaceBiometricsFacial recognition systemSession (web analytics)Human–computer interactionGraphical user interfaceFace detectionUser interfaceIdentity (music)Face (sociological concept)Information securityComputer securityFeature extractionArtificial intelligenceOperating systemWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information security requires a method to establish digital credentials that can reliably identify individual users. Since biometrics is concerned with the measurements of unique human physiological or behavioural characteristics, the technology has been used to verify the identity of computer or network users. Given today's heightened security requirements of military as well as other applications such as banking, health care, etc., it is becoming critical to be able to monitor the presence of the authenticated user throughout a session. This paper presents a prototype system that uses facial recognition technology to monitor the authenticated user. The objective is to ensure that the user who is using the computer is the same person that logged onto the system. A neural network-based algorithm is implemented to carry out face detection, and an eigenface method is employed to perform facial recognition. A graphical user interface (GUI) has been developed which allows the performance of face detection and facial recognition to be monitored at run time. The experimental results demonstrate the feasibility of near-real-time continuous user verification for high-level security information 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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations20
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207