Learning Global-Local Distance Metrics for Signature-Based Biometric Cryptosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biometric traits, such as fingerprints, faces and signatures have been employed in bio-cryptosystems to secure cryptographic keys within digital security schemes. Reliable implementations of these systems employ error correction codes formulated as simple distance thresholds, although they may not effectively model the complex variability of behavioral biometrics like signatures. In this paper, a Global-Local Distance Metric (GLDM) framework is proposed to learn cost-effective distance metrics, which reduce within-class variability and augment between-class variability, so that simple error correction thresholds of bio-cryptosystems provide high classification accuracy. First, a large number of samples from a development dataset are used to train a global distance metric that differentiates within-class from between-class samples of the population. Then, once user-specific samples are available for enrollment, the global metric is tuned to a local user-specific one. Proof-of-concept experiments on two reference offline signature databases confirm the viability of the proposed approach. Distance metrics are produced based on concise signature representations consisting of about 20 features and a single prototype. A signature-based bio-cryptosystem is designed using the produced metrics and has shown average classification error rates of about 7% and 17% for the PUCPR and the GPDS-300 databases, respectively. This level of performance is comparable to that obtained with complex state-of-the-art classifiers.
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 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".