Linguistic Profiles in Biometric Security System for Online User Authentication
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
A typical biometric system aims to recognize individuals based on their unique physiological or behavioral traits. Online Social Networking (OSN) platforms have become an integral part of the daily life of individuals, where they leave a recognizable trail of behavioral information. Social Behavioral Biometric (SBB), being an emerging trend, focuses on such trails to distinguish between individuals. This research investigates the impact of users' writing profiles on OSN to conclude whether such profiles contribute to SBB. The distinctiveness of the SBB features that are extracted from the social behavioral data of Twitter is studied. A person identification system that relies on the writing profiles of OSN users is proposed. The developed system is cross-validated on a social interaction database of 241 Twitter users. The rank-1 identification rate from users' writing profiles is 91.70% and the rank-8 identification rate is 99%. Furthermore, the experimental results establish that the users' writing profiles have the highest impact over other social biometric features.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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