- Home
- Search Results
- Page 1 of 1
Search for: All records
-
Total Resources1
- Resource Type
-
0001000000000000
- More
- Availability
-
10
- Author / Contributor
- Filter by Author / Creator
-
-
Becker, Benedict (1)
-
Bowyer, Kevin W. (1)
-
Czajka, Adam (1)
-
Gragnaniello, Diego (1)
-
He, Lingxiao (1)
-
Kohli, Naman (1)
-
Li, Haiqing (1)
-
Liu, Nianfeng (1)
-
Noore, Afzel (1)
-
Ru, Yiwei (1)
-
Sansone, Carlo (1)
-
Schuckers, Stephanie (1)
-
Singh, Richa (1)
-
Sun, Zhenan (1)
-
Tan, Tieniu (1)
-
Vatsa, Mayank (1)
-
Verdoliva, Luisa (1)
-
Yadav, Daksha (1)
-
Yambay, David (1)
-
#Tyler Phillips, Kenneth E. (0)
-
- Filter by Editor
-
-
& Spizer, S. M. (0)
-
& . Spizer, S. (0)
-
& Ahn, J. (0)
-
& Bateiha, S. (0)
-
& Bosch, N. (0)
-
& Brennan K. (0)
-
& Brennan, K. (0)
-
& Chen, B. (0)
-
& Chen, Bodong (0)
-
& Drown, S. (0)
-
& Ferretti, F. (0)
-
& Higgins, A. (0)
-
& J. Peters (0)
-
& Kali, Y. (0)
-
& Ruiz-Arias, P.M. (0)
-
& S. Spitzer (0)
-
& Sahin. I. (0)
-
& Spitzer, S. (0)
-
& Spitzer, S.M. (0)
-
(submitted - in Review for IEEE ICASSP-2024) (0)
-
-
Have feedback or suggestions for a way to improve these results?
!
Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
Presentation attacks such as using a contact lens with a printed pattern or printouts of an iris can be utilized to bypass a biometric security system. The first international iris liveness competition was launched in 2013 in order to assess the performance of presentation attack detection (PAD) algorithms, with a second competition in 2015. This paper presents results of the third competition, LivDet-Iris 2017. Three software-based approaches to Presentation Attack Detection were submitted. Four datasets of live and spoof images were tested with an additional cross-sensor test. New datasets and novel situations of data have resulted in this competition being of a higher difficulty than previous competitions. Anonymous received the best results with a rate of rejected live samples of 3.36% and rate of accepted spoof samples of 14.71%. The results show that even with advances, printed iris attacks as well as patterned contacts lenses are still difficult for software-based systems to detect. Printed iris images were easier to be differentiated from live images in comparison to patterned contact lenses as was also seen in previous competitions.more » « less
An official website of the United States government
