Advertisement

Automatic Configuration for a Biometrics-Based Physical Access Control System

  • Michael Beattie
  • B. V. K. Vijaya Kumar
  • Simon Lucey
  • Ozan K. Tonguz
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3781)

Abstract

Selecting appropriate thresholds and fusion rules for a system involving multiple biometric verifiers requires knowledge of the match score statistics for each verifier. While this statistical information can often be measured from training data, that data may not be representative of the environment into which each verifier is deployed. To compensate for missing statistics, we present a technique for estimating the error rates of each verifier using decisions made after a system has been deployed. While this post-deployment data lacks class labels, it is guaranteed to be representative. Extracted error rates can be used to select appropriate fusion rules and search for thresholds that meet operational requirements.

Keywords

Information System Error Rate Pattern Recognition Data Processing Training Data 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Beattie, M., Kumar, B.V.K., Lucey, S., Tonguz, O.: Combining verification deci¬sions in a multi-vendor environment. In: Audio- and Video-based Biometric Person Authentication, AVBPA (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kittler, J., Hater, M., Duin, R.: On combining classifiers. IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI) 20, 226–239 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ross, A., Jain, A.: Information fusion in biometrics. Pattern Recognition Letters 24, 2115–2125 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dempster, A., Laird, N., Rubin, D.: Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 39, 1–38 (1977)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Phillips, P., Plynn, P.J., Scruggs, T., Bowyer, K.W., Hoffman, J.C., Marques, K., Min, J., Worek, J.: Overview of the face recognition grand challenge. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, L., Liao, H., Lin, J., Ko, M., Yu, C.: A new LDA-based face recognition system which can solve the small sample size problem. Pattern Recognition 33, 1713–1726 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Belhumeur, P., Hespanha, J., Kriegman, D.: Eigenfaces vs. Fisherfaces: Recognition using class specific linear projection. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI) 19, 711–720 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mak, M., Zhang, W., He, M.: Determination of a priori decision threshold for phrase-prompted speaker verification. In: International Workshop on Multimedia Data Storage, Retrieval, Integration and Applications, pp. 96–103 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pierot, J.B., Lindberg, J., Koowaaij, J., Hutter, H.P., Genoud, D., Blomberg, M., Bimbot, F.: A comparison of a priori threshold setting procedures for speaker verification in the cave project. In: International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), vol. 1, pp. 125–128 (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Beattie
    • 1
  • B. V. K. Vijaya Kumar
    • 1
  • Simon Lucey
    • 1
  • Ozan K. Tonguz
    • 1
  1. 1.Carnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations