Advertisement

Analysis of Authentic Signatures and Forgeries

  • Katrin Franke
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5718)

Abstract

The paper presents empirical studies of kinematic and kinetic signature characteristics. In contrast to previous studies a more in-depth analysis is performed which reveals insides on differences and similarities of authentic and mimicked signing movements. It is shown that the signing behavior of genuine writers and impostors is only likely to differ in terms of local characteristics. Global characteristics can easily be imitated by skilled forgers. Moreover, it is shown that authentic writing characteristics cover a broad value range that might interfere with value ranges of unsophisticated forgeries. In our experiments signing behavior of 55 authentic writers and of 32 writers mimicking signature samples with three different levels of graphical complexity is studied. We discuss implications for ink-trace characteristics on paper and provide recommendations for implementing computer-based analysis methods.

Keywords

signature verification handwriting behavior forensic examination combined on-/offline analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Franke, K.: The Influence of Physical and Biomechanical Processes on the Ink Trace - Methodological foundations for the forensic analysis of signatures. PhD thesis, Artifical Instelligence Institute, University of Groningen, The Netherlands (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schomaker, L., Plamondon, R.: The relation between pen force and pen point kinematics in handwriting. Biological Cybernetics 63, 277–289 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van Galen, G.: Handwriting: Issues for a psychomotor theory. Human Movement Science 10 (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smyth, M., Silvers, G.: Functions of vision in the control of handwriting. Acta Psychologica 65, 47–64 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    van Galen, G., van Gemmert, A.: Kinematic and dynamic features of forging another person’s handwriting. Journal of Forensic Document Examination 9, 1–25 (1996)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Conrad, W.: Empirische Untersuchungen zur Differentialdiagnose zwischen verschiedenen Unterschriftsgattungen. Zeitschrift für Menschenkunde 35, 195–222 (1971) (in German)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Found, B.: The Forensic Analysis of Behavioural Artefacts: Investigations of Theoretical and Analytical Approaches to Handwriting Identification. PhD thesis, LaTrobe University Bundoora (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Halder-Sinn, P., Funsch, K.: Die Diagnose von Haltepunkten - Mehr als ein blosses Ratespiel? Mannheimer Hefte für Schriftenvergleichung 22(3), 3–12 (1996) ( in German)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leung, S., Cheng, Y., Fung, H., Poon, N.: Forgery I: Simulation. Journal of Forensic Sciences 38(2), 402–412 (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leung, S., Cheng, Y., Fung, H., Poon, N.: Forgery II: Tracing. Journal of Forensic Sciences 38(2), 413–424 (1993)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thomassen, A., van Galen, G.: Temporal features of handwriting: Challenges for forensic analysis. In: Proc. 5th European Conference for Police and Handwriting Experts, The Hague, The Netherlands (1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    van Gemmert, A., van Galen, G., Hardy, H.: Dynamical features of disguised handwriting. In: Proc. 5th European Conference for Police and Handwriting Experts, The Hague, The Netherlands (1996)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Gemmert, A., van Galen, G.: Dynamic features of mimicking another person’s writing and signature. In: Simner, M., Leedham, C., Thomassen, A. (eds.) Handwriting and drawing research: Basic and applied issues, pp. 459–471. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1996)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    van den Heuvel, C., van Galen, G., Teulings, H., van Gemmert, A.: Axial pen force increases with processing demands in handwriting. Acta Psychologica 100, 145–159 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    van Gemmert, A.: The effects of mental load and stress on the dynamics of fine motor tasks. PhD thesis, Catholic University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Beenders, M.: On-line and off-line signature verification techniques from a psychomotor perspective. Master’s thesis, Catholic University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    van Galen, G., van Doorn, R., Schomaker, L.: Effects of motor programming on the power spectral density function of finger and wrist movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 16, 755–765 (1990)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baier, P.: Schreibdruckmessung in Schriftpsychologie und Schriftvergleichung - Entwicklung und experimentelle Überprüfung neuer Registrierungsverfahren (1980) (in German)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Deinet, W., Linke, M., Rieger, B.: Analyse der Schreibdynamik. Technical report, Bundeskriminalamt Wiesbaden, Thaerstraße, Wiesbaden, Germany, vol. 11, p. 65193 (1987) (in German)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Plamondon, R., Lorette, G.: Automatic signature verification and writer identification - the state of the art. Pattern Recognition 22, 107–131 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Maus, E.: Schriftdruckmessung: Grundlagen, Methoden, Instrumente. Sciptura, Lothar Michel Weinheim Bergstraße (1996) (in German)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Doermann, D., Rosenfeld, A.: Recovery of temporal information from static images of handwriting. In: Proc. of Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 162–168 (1992)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Doermann, D., Rosenfeld, A.: The interpretation and recognition of interfering strokes. In: Proc. International Workshop on Frontiers in Handwriting Recognition (IWFHR), Tajon, Korea, pp. 41–50 (1993)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schomaker, L., Bulacu, M., Erp, M.: Sparse-parametric writer identification using heterogeneous feature groups. In: Proc. IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), Barcelona, Spain, pp. 545–548 (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Franke, K., Rose, S.: Ink-deposition model: The relation of writing and ink deposition processes. In: Proc. 9th International Workshop on Frontiers in Handwriting Recognition (IWFHR), Tokyo, Japan, pp. 173–178 (2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Blankers, V.L., van den Heuvel, C.E., Franke, K., Vuurpijl, L.: The ICDAR 2009 signature verification competition with On- and Offline Skilled Forgeries (2009), http://sigcomp09.arsforenscia.org
  27. 27.
    Franke, K., Schomaker, L., Veenhuis, C., Taubenheim, C., Guyon, I., Vuurpijl, L., van Erp, M., Zwarts, G.: WANDA: A generic framework applied in forensic handwriting analysis and writer identification. In: Abraham, A., Köppen, M., Franke, K. (eds.) Design and Application of Hybrid Intelligent Systems, Proc. 3rd International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems (HIS 2003), pp. 927–938. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Blankers, V.L., van den Heuvel, C.E., Franke, K., Vuurpijl, L.: The icdar 2009 signature verification competition (sigcomp 2009). In: Proc. 10th International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition, (ICDAR 2009) (2009) (in press)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Alewijnse, L.C., van den Heuvel, C.E., Stoel, R., Franke, K.: Analysis of signature complexity. In: Proc. 14th Conference of the International Graphonomics Society (IGS 2009) (2009) (in press)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Brault, J., Plamondon, R.: A complexity measure of handwritten curves: Modeling of dynamic signature forgery. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 23, 400–413 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hecker, M.: Forensische Handschriftenuntersuchung. Kriminalistik Verlag (1993) (in German)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Michel, L.: Gerichtliche Schriftvergleichung. De Gruyter (1982) (in German)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wacom Co. Ltd.: (2003), http://www.wacom.com/
  34. 34.
    Franke, K., Schomaker, L.: Pen orientation characteristics of on-line handwritten signatures. In: Teulings, H., van Gemmert, A. (eds.) Proc. 11th Conference of the International Graphonomics Society (IGS), Scottsdale, Arizona, USA, pp. 224–227 (2003)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shiavi, R.: Introduction to Applied Statistical Signal Analysis. Academic Press, San Diego (1999)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chen, C.: Digital Signal Processing - Spectral Computation and Filter Design. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dolfing, H.: Handwriting Recognition and Verification: A Hidden Markov Approach. PhD thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (1998)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Schmidt, C.: On-line Unterschriftenanalyse zur Benutzerverifikation. PhD thesis, RWTH Aachen University (1998) (in German)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wirtz, B.: Segmentorientierte Analyse und nichtlineare Auswertung für die dynamische Unterschriftsverifikation. PhD thesis, Technische Universität München (1998) (in German)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katrin Franke
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian Information Security LaboratoryGjøvik University CollegeNorway

Personalised recommendations