An Efficient Convolutional Neural Network for Fingerprint Pore Detection
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
Pore detection for fingerprint recognition has gained much research attention in recent years, in view of the existence of large number of pores in a small fingerprint segment and availability of high-resolution acquisition devices. Current research efforts have focused on developing two-part hybrid schemes, wherein the first part is comprised of a CNN architecture to produce a pore intensity map and the second part consists of a scheme that determines the pore centroids exploiting the knowledge base on the pores characteristics using this pore intensity map. However, CNN architectures used in the first part of the existing pore detection schemes are unable to extract pore features that adequately represent the fingerprints at a reasonable computational cost and in the second part the methods are not able to exploit the knowledge base on fingerprint pores efficiently. In this paper, a new two-part fingerprint pore detection scheme is proposed, wherein the first part focuses on developing a CNN architecture capable of extracting highly representational pore features and the second part on accurately determining the pore centroids by taking into consideration the inadequacies in fingerprint acquisition and distinguishing the spatial characteristics of true and false pores. Extensive experiments are performed to demonstrate the distinct characteristics to show the superiority of the proposed scheme in performance and complexity over the existing state-of-the-art pore detection schemes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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