MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944648082 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2914992

A Multi-Biometric System Based on Feature and Score Level Fusions

2019· article· en· W2944648082 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBiometric Identification and Security
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNormalization (sociology)BiometricsWeightingComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceFusionFeature (linguistics)ModalitiesModality (human–computer interaction)Sensor fusionFingerprint recognitionFingerprint (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In general, the information of multiple biometric modalities is fused at a single level, for example, score level or feature level. The recognition accuracy of a multimodal biometric system may not be improved by carrying fusion at a single level, since one matcher may provide a performance lower than that provided by other matchers. In view of this, we propose a new fusion scheme, referred to as the matcher performance-based (MPb) fusion scheme, in which the fusion is carried out at two levels, feature level, and score level, to improve the overall recognition accuracy. First, we consider the performance of the individual matchers in order to find out which of the modalities should be used for fusion at the feature level. Then, the selected modalities are fused at this level by utilizing their encoded features. Next, we fuse the score obtained from the feature-level fusion with that of the modality for which the performance is the highest. In order to carry out this fusion, a new normalization technique referred to as the overlap extrema-variation-based anchored min-max (OEVBAMM) normalization technique, is also proposed. By considering three modalities, namely, fingerprint, palmprint, and earprint, the performance of the proposed fusion scheme as well as that of the single level fusion scheme, both with various normalization and weighting techniques are evaluated in terms of a number of metrics. It is shown that the multi-biometric system based on the proposed fusion scheme provides the best performance when it employs the new normalization technique and the confidence-based weighting (CBW) method.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.221 · 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