Cognitive Computation

, Volume 9, Issue 5, pp 712–720 | Cite as

A Comparative Study of In-Air Trajectories at Short and Long Distances in Online Handwriting

  • Carlos Alonso-Martinez
  • Marcos Faundez-Zanuy
  • Jiri Mekyska
Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Existing literature about online handwriting analysis to support pathology diagnosis has taken advantage of in-air trajectories. A similar situation occurred in biometric security applications where the goal is to identify or verify an individual using his signature or handwriting. These studies do not consider the distance of the pen tip to the writing surface. This is due to the fact that current acquisition devices do not provide height formation. However, it is quite straightforward to differentiate movements at two different heights (a) short distance: height lower or equal to 1 cm above a surface of digitizer, the digitizer provides x and y coordinates; (b) long distance: height exceeding 1 cm, the only information available is a time stamp that indicates the time that a specific stroke has spent at long distance. Although short distance has been used in several papers, long distances have been ignored and will be investigated in this paper. In this paper, we will analyze a large set of databases (BIOSECUR-ID, EMOTHAW, PaHaW, OXYGEN-THERAPY, and SALT), which contain a total amount of 663 users and 17,951 files. We have specifically studied (a) the percentage of time spent on-surface, in-air at short distance, and in-air at long distance for different user profiles (pathological and healthy users) and different tasks; (b) the potential use of these signals to improve classification rates. Our experimental results reveal that long distance movements represent a very small portion of the total execution time (0.5% in the case of signatures and 10.4% for uppercase words of BIOSECUR-ID, which is the largest database). In addition, significant differences have been found in the comparison of pathological versus control group for letter “l” in PaHaW database (p = 0.0157) and crossed pentagons in SALT database (p = 0.0122).

Keywords

Handwriting Biometrics In-air trajectories 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has been supported by FEDER and MEC, TEC2016-77791-C4-2-R, 16-30805A, SIX (CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0072), and LOl401.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Statement of Human and Animal Rights

This chapter does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Faundez-Zanuy M, et al. Biometric applications related to human beings: there is life beyond security. Cogn Comput. 2013;5(1):136–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lopez-de-Ipiña K, et al. On automatic diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease based on spontaneous speech analysis and emotional temperature. Cogn Comput. 2015;7(1):44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sesa-Nogueras E, Faundez-Zanuy M, Roure-Alcobé J. Gender classification by means of online uppercase handwriting: a text-dependent allographic approach. Cogn Comput. 2016;8(1):15–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rosenblum S, Luria G. Applying a handwriting measurement model for capturing cognitive load implications through complex figure drawing. Cogn Comput. 2016;8(1):69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sesa-Nogueras E, Faundez-Zanuy M, Mekyska J. An information analysis of in-air and on-surface trajectories in online handwriting. Cogn Comput. 2012;4(2):195–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fierrez J, et al. BiosecurID: a multimodal biometric database. Pattern Anal Applic. 2010;13(2):235–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Likforman-Sulem L, Esposito A, Faundez-Zanuy M, Clémençon S, Cordasco G. EMOTHAW: “A Novel Database for Emotional State Recognition from Handwriting and Drawing”. IEEE Trans Hum Mach Syst. 2017;PP(99):1–12. doi: 10.1109/THMS.2016.2635441.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Drotár P, Mekyska J, Rektorová I, Masarová L, Smékal Z, Faundez-Zanuy M. Evaluation of handwriting kinematics and pressure for differential diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease. Artif Intell Med. 2016;67:39–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fiz JA, Faundez-Zanuy M, Monte-Moreno E, Alcobé JR, Andreo F, Gomez R, et al. Short term oxygen therapy effects in hypoxemic patients measured by drawing analysis. Comput Methods Prog Biomed. 2015;118(3):330–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garre-Olmo, J., et al.. Kinematic and pressure features of handwriting and drawing: preliminary results between patients with mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer disease and healthy controls. Curr Alzheimer Res. 2017.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental status”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12(3):189–98. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ESUP Tecnocampus (Pompeu Fabra University)MataróSpain
  2. 2.Department of Telecommunications, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and CommunicationBrno University of TechnologyBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations