MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805079381 · doi:10.5539/ass.v14n6p1

Generating a Cancellable Fingerprint using Matrices Operations and Its Fingerprint Processing Requirements

2018· article· en· W2805079381 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBiometric Identification and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatrix (chemical analysis)RowRow and column spacesKronecker productComputer scienceBiometricsFingerprint (computing)Set (abstract data type)ArithmeticMatrix multiplicationInvertible matrixMathematicsAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceKronecker deltaPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancellable fingerprint uses transformed or intentionally distorted biometric data instead of the original biometric data for identifying person. When a set of biometric data is found to be compromised, they can be discarded, and a new set of biometric data can be regenerated. This initial principal is identical with a non-invertible concept in matrices operations. In matrix domain, a matrix cannot be transformed into its original form if it meets several requirements such as non-square form matrix, consist of one zero row/column, and no row as multiple of another row. These conditions can be acquired by implementing three matrix operations using Kronecker Product (KP) operation, Elementary Row Operation (ERO), and Inverse Matrix (INV) operation. KP is useful to produce a non-square form matrix, to enlarge the size of matrix, to distinguish and disguise the element of matrix by multiplying each of elements of the matrix with a particular matrix. ERO can be defined as multiplication and addition force to matrix rows. INV is utilized to transform one matrix to another one with a different element or form as a reciprocal matrix of the original. These three matrix operations should be implemented together in generating the cancellable feature to robust image. So, if once three conditions are met by imposter, it is impossible to find the original image of the fingerprint. The initial aim of these operations is to camouflage the original look of the fingerprint feature into an abstract-look to deceive an un-authorized personal using the fingerprint irresponsibly. In this research, several fingerprint processing steps such as fingerprint pre-processing, core-point identification, region of interest, minutiae extration, etc; are determined to improve the quality of the cancellable feature. Three different databases i.e. FVC2002, FVC2004, and BRC are utilized in this work.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.283 · 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