MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Benchmarking Lightweight Deep Learning Models for In-Vehicle Face Anti-Spoofing

2025· article· en· W4413181373 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Ruiz, Soodeh Nikan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBiometric Identification and Security
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmarkingComputer scienceFace (sociological concept)Deep learningArtificial intelligenceSpoofing attackComputer securityBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In-vehicle face anti-spoofing (FAS) is a crucial security requirement for automotive facial authentication systems in modern cars. Given the demanding cabin environments and limited computational resources, VFPAD (in-Vehicle Face Presentation Attack Detection) dataset, a benchmark for NIR (near infrared)-based in-vehicle presentation attack detection, is used in this case study to evaluate six lightweight deep learning architectures: FeatherNetB, MobileNetV3-small, MiniFASNetV2, MobileNetV4-small, MobileViTV3-XS, and EfficientNetV2-B0. Using a consistent training protocol with transfer learning and fine-tuning, we assess each model according to its classification performance (average classification error rate (ACER), accuracy, and F1 score) and efficiency (floating point operations per second (FLOPS) and number of model parameters). According to experimental results, more recent mobile-oriented deep neural networks (DNNs)-MobileNetV4 and EfficientNetV2-B0 in particular-perform better than older and transformer-based designs, achieving ACERs as low as 0.0086 while keeping latency and model sizes small. Our results highlight the feasibility of implementing real-time FAS systems in vehicular environments with contemporary lightweight architectures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiometric Identification and SecurityFrench-language works237,207