MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034303608 · doi:10.1109/tifs.2020.3001729

EEG-based Human Recognition Using Steady-State AEPs and Subject-Unique Spatial Filters

2020· article· en· W3034303608 on OpenAlexafffund
Sherif Nagib Abbas Seha, Dimitrios Hatzinakos

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBrain–computer interfaceBiometricsElectroencephalographySpeech recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceSession (web analytics)Feature extractionFeature (linguistics)ReplicateMathematicsPsychologyStatisticsNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, brainwaves (EEG) have gained increasing attention in the field of biometric authentication because they feature vital advantages being more secure and impossible to replicate. In this paper, a new approach for the EEG-based biometric recognition system is proposed using steady-state Auditory Evoked Potentials (AEPs). This class of modular brainwaves adds extra features to the system like cancelability and two-step authentication. To investigate the biometric potential of AEPs, brainwaves from 40 subjects were recorded while being stimulated by multiple auditory tones modulated at two frequency bands; 40 Hz (m-40) and 80 Hz (m-80). Each subject participated in two sessions on two different days for time-permanence evaluation. Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) techniques were adopted here for the rapid estimation of the AEPs using canonical correlation analysis. The energy distribution of the AEPs in different frequency bands represented the subject-unique features. For intra-session setup, correct recognition rates up to 96.46% and equal error rates as low as 0% were achieved using the m-80 stimulation over all the 40 subjects. Moreover, results across different sessions showed high recognition rates (94.5 - 96.5%) and low error rates (2 - 4%) over the same number of subjects. These results show that AEPs carry subject discriminating features allowing the possibility of employing AEPs as a biometric trait.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and SecuritySame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207