MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048672684 · doi:10.1007/s12559-020-09755-z

Handwriting Biometrics: Applications and Future Trends in e-Security and e-Health

2020· article· en· W3048672684 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

VenueCognitive Computation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersMinisterio de Asuntos Económicos y Transformación Digital, Gobierno de EspañaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaComunidad de MadridFundación BBVA
KeywordsBiometricsHandwritingComputer scienceComputer securityArtificial intelligenceInternet privacyHuman–computer interactionSpeech recognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Online handwritten analysis presents many applications in e-security, signature biometrics being the most popular but not the only one. Handwriting analysis also has an important set of applications in e-health. Both kinds of applications (e-security and e-health) have some unsolved questions and relations among them that should be addressed in the next years. We summarize the state of the art and applications based on handwriting signals. Later on, we focus on the main achievements and challenges that should be addressed by the scientific community, providing a guide for future research. Among all the points discussed in this article, we remark the importance of considering security, health, and metadata from a joint perspective. This is especially critical due to the risks inherent when using these behavioral signals.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.276 · 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