Noncontact Palm Vein ROI Extraction Based on Improved Lightweight HRnet in Complex Backgrounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The extraction of ROI (region of interest) was a key step in noncontact palm vein recognition, which was crucial for the subsequent feature extraction and feature matching. A noncontact palm vein ROI extraction algorithm based on the improved HRnet for keypoints localization was proposed for dealing with hand gesture irregularities, translation, scaling, and rotation in complex backgrounds. To reduce the computation time and model size for ultimate deploying in low‐cost embedded systems, this improved HRnet was designed to be lightweight by reconstructing the residual block structure and adopting depth‐separable convolution, which greatly reduced the model size and improved the inference speed of network forward propagation. Next, the palm vein ROI localization and palm vein recognition are processed in self‐built dataset and two public datasets (CASIA and TJU‐PV). The proposed improved HRnet algorithm achieved 97.36% accuracy for keypoints detection on self‐built palm vein dataset and 98.23% and 98.74% accuracy for keypoints detection on two public palm vein datasets (CASIA and TJU‐PV), respectively. The model size was only 0.45 M, and on a CPU with a clock speed of 3 GHz, the average running time of ROI extraction for one image was 0.029 s. Based on the keypoints and corresponding ROI extraction, the equal error rate (EER) of palm vein recognition was 0.000362%, 0.014541%, and 0.005951% and the false nonmatch rate was 0.000001%, 11.034725%, and 4.613714% (false match rate: 0.01%) in the self‐built dataset, TJU‐PV, and CASIA, respectively. The experimental result showed that the proposed algorithm was feasible and effective and provided a reliable experimental basis for the research of palm vein recognition technology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".