An Enhanced Electrocardiogram Biometric Authentication System Using Machine Learning
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
Traditional authentication systems use alphanumeric or graphical passwords, or token-based techniques that require “something you know and something you have”. The disadvantages of these systems include the risks of forgetfulness, loss, and theft. To address these shortcomings, biometric authentication is rapidly replacing traditional authentication methods and is becoming a part of everyday life. The electrocardiogram (ECG) is one of the most recent traits considered for biometric purposes. In this work we describe an ECG-based authentication system suitable for security checks and hospital environments. The proposed system will help investigators studying ECG-based biometric authentication techniques to define dataset boundaries and to acquire high-quality training data. We evaluated the performance of the proposed system and found that it could achieve up to the 92% identification accuracy. In addition, by applying the Amang ECG (amgecg) toolbox within MATLAB, we investigated the two parameters that directly affect the accuracy of authentication: the ECG slicing time (sliding window) and the sampling time period, and found their optimal values.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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