Enhanced Palmprint Recognition via Curvi-Linear Anisotropic Gaussian Filter-Based Combined Differential Concavity and Infirmity Codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inherent curvature in palm lines can pose challenges for palmprint recognition, particularly at lower resolutions where wrinkles become indistinguishable, leading to performance degradation.To address these issues, this study introduces a novel methodology employing curvi-linear anisotropic Gaussian filter-based Combined Differential Concavity and Infirmity (CDCI) codes.The use of curved filters has been proposed to represent curved palm lines more accurately, while anisotropic filtering is expected to enhance the extraction of blurred palm lines.The new representation, grounded in curvi-linear anisotropic Gaussian filtering, is posited to improve the recognition system's performance by effectively addressing these challenges.The proposed approach's effectiveness has been tested using the touchless IITD database and the contact-based PolyU 2D database.The experimental results suggest that the proposed methodology surpasses the performance of state-of-the-art coding-based procedures in palmprint recognition with the improvement of 3.82% and 36.36% in recognition rate and equal error rate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".