Search for: All records

Biometric recognition allows a person to be identified by comparing feature vectors derived from a person's physiological characteristics. Recognition is dependent on the permanence of the biometric characteristics over long periods of time. There was been limited work evaluating the footprint as a potential biometric. This paper presents a longitudinal study of toe prints in children to understand if this biometric modality could be used reliably as a child grows. Data was collected and analyzed in children ages 4-13 years over five visits, spaced approximately six months apart, giving two years of data. This is the first footprint collection spanning this broad age range in children. Footprints were segmented into separate toe prints to examine whether current fingerprint recognition technology can provide accurate results on toe prints. Data was analyzed using two available fingerprint matchers, Verifinger and Bo-zorth3 from NIST Biometric Image Software (NBIS). Ver-ifinger provides the best verification match scores using the toe prints, especially when using the hallux, the large toe. The hallux toe on Verifinger provides verification rates of 0% FAR and FRR for images collected on the same day and a FRR of 6.44% at a 1% FAR after two years have passed between collections. Additional longitudinal data is being collected to further these results. 

Liveness Detection (LivDet)-Face is an international competition series open to academia and industry. The competition’s objective is to assess and report state-of-the-art in liveness / Presentation Attack Detection (PAD) for face recognition. Impersonation and presentation of false samples to the sensors can be classified as presentation attacks and the ability for the sensors to detect such attempts is known as PAD. LivDet-Face 2021 * will be the first edition of the face liveness competition. This competition serves as an important benchmark in face presentation attack detection, offering (a) an independent assessment of the current state of the art in face PAD, and (b) a common evaluation protocol, availability of Presentation Attack Instruments (PAI) and live face image dataset through the Biometric Evaluation and Testing (BEAT) platform. The competition can be easily followed by researchers after it is closed, in a platform in which participants can compare their solutions against the LivDet-Face winners. 

Fingerprint capture systems can be fooled by widely accessible methods to spoof the system using fake fingers, known as presentation attacks. As biometric recognition systems become more extensively relied upon at international borders and in consumer electronics, presentation attacks are becoming an increasingly serious issue. A robust solution is needed that can handle the increased variability and complexity of spoofing techniques. This paper demonstrates the viability of utilizing a sensor with time-series and color-sensing capabilities to improve the robust-ness of a traditional fingerprint sensor and introduces a comprehensive fingerprint dataset with over 36,000 image sequences and a state-of-the-art set of spoofing techniques. The specific sensor used in this research captures a traditional gray-scale static capture and a time-series color capture simultaneously. Two different methods for Presentation Attack Detection (PAD) are used to assess the benefit of a color dynamic capture. The first algorithm utilizes Static-Temporal Feature Engineering on the fingerprint capture to generate a classification decision. The second generates its classification decision using features extracted by way of the Inception V3 CNN trained on ImageNet. Classification performance is evaluated using features extracted exclusively from the static capture, exclusively from the dynamic capture, and on a fusion of the two feature sets. With both PAD approaches we find that the fusion of the dynamic and static feature-set is shown to improve performance to a level not individually achievable. 

Launched in 2013, LivDet-Iris is an international competition series open to academia and industry with the aim to assess and report advances in iris Presentation Attack Detection (PAD). This paper presents results from the fourth competition of the series: LivDet-Iris 2020. This year's competition introduced several novel elements: (a) incorporated new types of attacks (samples displayed on a screen, cadaver eyes and prosthetic eyes), (b) initiated LivDet-Iris as an on-going effort, with a testing protocol available now to everyone via the Biometrics Evaluation and Testing (BEAT)* open-source platform to facilitate reproducibility and benchmarking of new algorithms continuously, and (c) performance comparison of the submitted entries with three baseline methods (offered by the University of Notre Dame and Michigan State University), and three open-source iris PAD methods available in the public domain. The best performing entry to the competition reported a weighted average APCER of 59.10% and a BPCER of 0.46% over all five attack types. This paper serves as the latest evaluation of iris PAD on a large spectrum of presentation attack instruments. 

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.