Fusion of Neuro-Signals and Dynamic Signatures for Person Authentication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many biometric systems based on physiological traits such as ones facial characteristics, iris, and fingerprint have been developed for authentication purposes. Such security systems, however, commonly suffer from impersonation attacks such as obfuscation, abrasion, latent samples, and covert attack. More conventional behavioral methods, such as passwords and signatures, suffer from similar issues and can easily be spoofed. With growing levels of private data readily available across the internet, a more robust authentication system is needed for use in emerging technologies and mobile applications. In this paper, we present a novel multimodal biometric user authentication framework by combining the behavioral dynamic signature with the the physiological electroencephalograph (EEG) to restrict unauthorized access. EEG signals of 33 genuine users were collected while signing on their mobile phones. The recorded sequences were modeled using a bidirectional long short-term memory neural network (BLSTM-NN) based sequential classifier to accomplish person identification and verification. An accuracy of 98.78% was obtained for identification using decision fusion of dynamic signatures and EEG signals. The robustness of the framework was also tested against 1650 impersonation attempts made by 25 forged users by imitating the dynamic signatures of genuine users. Verification performance was measured using detection error tradeoff (DET) curves and half total error rate (HTER) security matrices using true positive rate (TPR) and false acceptance rate (FAR), resulting in 3.75% FAR and 1.87% HTER with 100% TPR for forgery attempts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".