MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2268339064 · doi:10.1109/tim.2015.2503863

ECG Authentication for Mobile Devices

2015· article· en· W2268339064 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPasswordBiometricsLoginComputer scienceAuthentication (law)Mobile phoneMobile deviceMobile computingMobile telephonyComputer securityReal-time computingComputer networkMobile radioWorld Wide WebTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional mobile login methods, like numerical or graphical passwords, are vulnerable to passive attacks. It is common for intruders to gain access to personal information of their victims by watching them enter their passwords into their mobile screens from a close proximity. With this in mind, a mobile biometric authentication algorithm based on electrocardiogram (ECG) is proposed. With this algorithm, the user will only need to touch two ECG electrodes (lead I) of the mobile device to gain access. The algorithm was tested with a cell phone case heart monitor in a controlled laboratory experiment at different times and conditions with ten subjects and also with 73 records obtained from the Physionet database. The obtained results reveal that our algorithm has 1.41% false acceptance rate and 81.82% true acceptance rate with 4 s of signal acquisition. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first approach on mobile authentication that uses ECG biometric signals and it shows a promising future for this technology. Nonetheless, further improvements are still needed to optimize accuracy while maintaining a short acquisition time for authentication.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.231 · 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