Palm-Print Classification by Global Features
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
Three-dimensional (3-D) palm print has proved to be a significant biometrics for personal authentication. Three-dimensional palm prints are harder to counterfeit than 2-D palm prints and more robust to variations in illumination and serious scrabbling on the palm surface. Previous work on 3-D palm-print recognition has concentrated on local features such as texture and lines. In this paper, we propose three novel global features of 3-D palm prints which describe shape information and can be used for coarse matching and indexing to improve the efficiency of palm-print recognition, particularly in very large databases. The three proposed shape features are maximum depth of palm center, horizontal cross-sectional area of different levels, and radial line length from the centroid to the boundary of 3-D palm-print horizontal cross section of different levels. We treat these features as a column vector and use orthogonal linear discriminant analysis to reduce their dimensionality. We then adopt two schemes: 1) coarse-level matching and 2) ranking support vector machine to improve the efficiency of palm-print recognition. We conducted a series of 3-D palm-print recognition experiments using an established 3-D palm-print database, and the results demonstrate that the proposed method can greatly reduce penetration rates.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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