Analysis of the effect of ageing, age, and other factors on iris recognition performance using NEXUS scores dataset
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The historical NEXUS iris kiosks log dataset collected by the Canada Border Services Agency from 2003 to 2014 has become the focus of scientific attention due to its involvement in the iris ageing debate between the National Institute of Standard and Technology and the University of Notre Dame researchers. To facilitate this debate, this study provides additional details on how this dataset was collected, its various properties and irregularities, and presents new results related to the effect of ageing, age, and other factors on the system performance obtained using the portions of the dataset that have not been previously analysed. In doing that, the importance of conducting subject‐based performance analysis, as opposed to the traditionally done transaction‐based analysis, is emphasised. The significance of factor effects is examined. Recommendations on further improvement of the technology are made.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.023 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it