Advertisement

Iris Liveness Detection by Modeling Dynamic Pupil Features

  • Adam Czajka
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition book series (ACVPR)

Abstract

The objective of this chapter is to present how to employ pupil dynamics in eye liveness detection. A thorough review of current liveness detection methods is provided at the beginning of the chapter to make the scientific background and position this method within current state-of-the-art methodology. Pupil dynamics may serve as a component of a wider presentation attack detection in iris recognition systems, making them more secure. Due to a lack of public databases that would support this research, we have built our own iris capture device to register pupil size changes under visible light stimuli, and registered 204 observations for 26 subjects (52 different irides), each containing 750 iris images taken every 40 ms. Each measurement registers the spontaneous pupil oscillations and its reaction after a sudden increase and a sudden decrease of the intensity of visible light. The Kohn and Clynes pupil dynamics model is used to describe these changes; hence, we convert each observation into a point in a feature space defined by model parameters. To answer the question whether the eye is alive (that is, if it reacts to light changes as a human eye) or the presentation is suspicious (that is, if it reacts oddly or no reaction is observed), we use linear and nonlinear support vector machines to classify natural reaction and spontaneous oscillations, simultaneously investigating the goodness of fit to reject bad modeling. Our experiments show that this approach can achieve a perfect performance for the data we have collected; all normal reactions are correctly differentiated from spontaneous oscillations. We investigated three variants of modeling to find the simplest, yet still powerful configuration of the method, namely (1) observing the pupil reaction to both the positive and negative changes in the light intensity, (2) using only the pupil reaction to positive surge of the light intensity, and (3) employing only the pupil reaction when the light is suddenly turned off. Further investigation related to the shortest observation time required to model the pupil reaction led to the final conclusion that time periods not exceeding 3 s are adequate to offer a perfect performance (on this dataset).

Keywords

Local Binary Pattern Iris Image Pupil Size Equal Error Rate Pattern Contact Lens 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Mr. Rafal Brize, who collected the database of iris images used in this work under his Master’s degree project lead by this author. The author is cordially grateful to Prof. Andrzej Pacut of Warsaw University of Technology for valuable remarks that significantly contributed to this research. The application of Kohn and Clynes model was inspired by research of Mr. Marcin Chochowski, who used parameters of this model as individual features in biometric recognition. This author, together with Prof. Pacut and Mr. Chochowski, has been granted a US patent No. 8,061,842 which partially covers the idea deployed in this work.

References

  1. 1.
    Biometric Institute, Biometric Vulnerability Assessment Expert Group (BVAEG). (2015) http://www.biometricsinstitute.org
  2. 2.
    J. Cohn et al., Automatic recognition of eye blinking in spontaneously occurring behavior. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 35(3), 420–428 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Connell et al., Fake iris detection using structured light, in 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) (2013), pp. 8692–8696Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Czajka, Database of iris printouts and its application: Development of liveness detection method for iris recognition, in 2013 18th International Conference on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics (MMAR) (2013), pp. 28–33Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Czajka, Pupil dynamics for iris liveness detection. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 10(4), 726–735 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Czajka, A. Pacut, Iris recognition system based on Zak-Gabor wavelet packets. J. Telecommun. Inf. Technol. 4, 10–18 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Czajka, A. Pacut, M. Chochowski, Method of eye aliveness testing and device for eye aliveness testing. US Patent No. 8.061.842. November 22, 2011Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Czajka, A. Pacut, M. Chochowski, Sposob testowania zywotnosci oka i urzadzenie do testowania zywotnosci oka (Method of Eye Aliveness Testing and Device for Eye Aliveness Testing). Polish Patent Application No. P380581. September 7, 2006Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Daugman, Countermeasures against subterfuge, in Biometrics: Personal Identication in Networked Society, ed. by Jain, Bolle, and Pankanti (Kluwer, Amsterdam, 1999), pp. 103–121Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Doyle, K. Bowyer, P.J. Flynn, Variation in accuracy of textured contact lens detection based on sensor and lens pattern. in 2013 IEEE Sixth International Conference on Biometrics: Theory, Applications and Systems (BTAS) (2013), pp. 1–7Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Galbally, S. Marcel, J. Fierrez, Image quality assessment for fake biometric detection: application to iris, fingerprint, and face recognition. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 23(2), 710–724 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Galbally et al., Iris liveness detection based on quality related features, in 2012 5th IAPR International Conference on Biometrics (ICB) (2012), pp. 271–276Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. Gragnaniello et al., An investigation of local descriptors for biometric spoofing detection. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 10(4), 849–863 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    X. He, Y. Lu, P. Shi, A new fake iris detection method, in Advances in Biometrics, ed. by M. Tistarelli and M. Nixon. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5558. (Springer, Berlin, 2009), pp. 1132–1139Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Y. He, Y.H.H. Yang, H. He, An elimination method of light spot based on iris image fusion. Commun. Comput. Inf. Sci. 15(12), 415–422 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Z. He et al., Efficient iris spoof detection via boosted local binary patterns, in Advances in Biometrics. ed. by M. Tistarelli and M. Nixon. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5558. (Springer, Berlin, 2009), pp. 1080–1090Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    K. Hughes, K.W. Bowyer, Detection of contact-lens-based iris biometric spoofs using stereo imaging, in 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (2013), pp. 1763–1772Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 37 Text of 3rd Working Draft 30107-1. Information Technology - Presentation Attack Detection—Part 1: Framework. April 13, 2015Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 37 Text of 3rd Working Draft 30107-3. Information Technology - Presentation Attack Detection—Part 3: Testing and reporting. February 18, 2015Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Kanematsu, H. Takano, K. Nakamura, Highly reliable liveness detection method for iris recognition, in SICE, 2007 Annual Conference (2007), pp. 361–364Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Kohn, M. Clynes, Color dynamics of the pupil. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 156(2), 931–950 (1969). Available online at Wiley Online Library (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    E.C. Lee, K.R. Park, Fake iris detection based on 3D structure of iris pattern. Int. J. Imaging Syst. Technol. 20(2), 162–166 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    E. Lee, K. Park, J. Kim, Fake iris detection by using Purkinje image, in Advances in Biometrics. ed. by D. Zhang and A. Jain. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3832 (Springer, Berlin, 2005), pp. 397–403Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    S.J. Lee, K.R. Park, J. Kim, Robust fake iris detection based on variation of the reflectance ratio between the iris and the sclera, in 2006 Biometrics Symposium: Special Session on Research at the Biometric Consortium Conference (2006), pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    T. Matsumoto, Artificial fingers and irises: importance of vulnerability analysis, in Proceedings of the Seventh International Biometrics Conference and Exhibition. London, United Kingdom (2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    D. Menotti et al., Deep representations for iris, face, and fingerprint spoofing detection. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 10(4), 864–879 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    A. Pacut, A. Czajka. Aliveness detection for iris biometrics, in 40th Annual IEEE International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology (2006), pp. 122–129Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    G. Pan, Z. Wu, L. Sun, Liveness Detection for Face Recognition, in Recent Advances in Face Recognition, ed. by K. Delac, M. Grgic, M.S. Bartlett (Springer, Berlin, 2008), pp. 109–124Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    J. Park, M. Kang, Iris recognition against counterfeit attack using gradient based fusion of multi-spectral images, in Advances in Biometric Person Authentication, ed. by S. Li et al. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3781 (Springer Berlin, 2005), pp. 150–156Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    N. Puhan, N. Sudha, A. Suhas Hegde, A new iris liveness detection method against contact lens spoofing, in 2011 IEEE 15th International Symposium on Consumer Electronics (ISCE) (2011), pp. 71–74Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    I. Rigas, O. Komogortsev, Gaze estimation as a framework for iris liveness detection, in 2014 IEEE International Joint Conference on Biometrics (IJCB) (2014), pp. 1–8Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    S. Schuckers, A. Czajka, K.W. Bowyer, LivDet-Iris 2015—Iris Liveness Detection Competition (2015). http://iris2015.livdet.org
  33. 33.
    A. Sequeira, J. Murari, J. Cardoso, Iris liveness detection methods in the mobile biometrics scenario, in 2014 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) (2014), pp. 3002–3008Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    A.F. Sequeira et al., MobiLine 2014 1st Mobile Iris Liveness Detection Competition (2014). http://mobilive2014.inescporto.pt
  35. 35.
    L. Thalheim, J. Krissler, P.-M. Ziegler, Biometric access protection devices and their programs put to the test. Available online in c’t Magazine, No. 11/2002 (2002), p. 114Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Trusted Biometrics under Spoofing Attacks (TABULA RASA), Project funded by the European Commission, under the Seventh Framework Programme (2013). http://www.tabularasa-euproject.org
  37. 37.
    F.M. Villalobos-Castaldi, E. Suaste-Gómez, A new spontaneous pupillary oscillation-based verification system. Expert Syst. Appl. 40(13), 5352–5362 (2013)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Z. Wei et al., Counterfeit iris detection based on texture analysis, in 19th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (2008)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    D. Yadav et al., Unraveling the effect of textured contact lenses on iris recognition. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 9(5), 851–862 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    D. Yambay et al., LivDet-iris 2013—Iris Liveness Detection Competition 2013, in 2014 IEEE International Joint Conference on Biometrics (IJCB) (2014), pp. 1–8Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    H. Zhang, Z. Sun, T. Tan, Contact lens detection based on weighted LBP, in 2010 20th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR) (2010), pp. 4279–4282Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Warsaw University of TechnologyWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Research and Academic Computer Network (NASK)WarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations