MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230773722 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14644191

Inverse biometrics for keystroke dynamics

2021· preprint· en· W4230773722 on OpenAlexaff
Fatema Rashid

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsKeystroke dynamicsComputer scienceKeystroke loggingProcess (computing)Interface (matter)Task (project management)Data miningHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceComputer securityEngineeringPassword

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tremendous research has been done in the area of computer security using biometrics. But not much has been done in the field of inverse biometrics, which consists of synthesizing artificial biometric samples that can be used for testing exiting biometric systems or protecting them against forgeries. Due to the complexity of the data collection process and privacy and legal issues that are involved, finding volunteers for data collection is a challenging task. In this thesis, we introduce for the first time an inverse biometrics model for keystroke dynamics that can be used to generate as much data as desired. We show that these synthetic data behave as close as possible like real human data, making our inverse biometrics model a model of choice for testing the existing and upcoming biometric systems. Keystrokes dynamics biometric is a behavioural biometric technology, which allows user recognition based on the actions received from the keyboard while interacting with a graphical user interface. The proposed inverse biometric model first learns from the real human data and based on this experience, it generates synthetic users. Each synthetic user generated by model has a unique behaviour, but follows the properties of real human users. A twofold cross-validation testing technique is employed to validate the synthetic data using a suitable model. Comparable performance results are obtained when applying the model to real human data.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207