MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197657583 · doi:10.3390/jcp1030024

Biometric Systems De-Identification: Current Advancements and Future Directions

2021· article· en· W3197657583 on OpenAlexafffund
Md Shopon, Sanjida Nasreen Tumpa, Yajurv Bhatia, K. N. Pavan Kumar, Marina L. Gavrilova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cybersecurity and Privacy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiometricsIdentification (biology)Context (archaeology)Computer scienceAuthentication (law)Domain (mathematical analysis)Computer securityInternet privacyData scienceGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biometric de-identification is an emerging topic of research within the information security domain that integrates privacy considerations with biometric system development. A comprehensive overview of research in the context of authentication applications spanning physiological, behavioral, and social-behavioral biometric systems and their privacy considerations is discussed. Three categories of biometric de-identification are introduced, namely complete de-identification, auxiliary biometric preserving de-identification, and traditional biometric preserving de-identification. An overview of biometric de-identification in emerging domains such as sensor-based biometrics, social behavioral biometrics, psychological user profile identification, and aesthetic-based biometrics is presented. The article concludes with open questions and provides a rich avenue for subsequent explorations of biometric de-identification in the context of information privacy.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.010
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cybersecurity and PrivacySame topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207