Some Issues on Choices of Modalities for Multimodal Biometric Systems

  • Mohammad Imran
  • Ashok Rao
  • S. Noushath
  • G. Hemantha Kumar
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 236)

Abstract

Biometrics-based authentication has advantages over other mechanisms, but there are several variabilities and vulnerabilities that need to be addressed. No single modality or combinations of modalities can be applied universally that is best for all applications. This paper deliberates different combinations of physiological biometric modalities with different levels of fusion. In our experiments, we have selected Face, Palmprint, Finger Knuckle Print, Iris, and Handvein modalities. All the modalities are of image type and publicly available, comprising at least 100 users. Proper selection of modalities for fusion can yield desired level of performance. Through our experiments it is learnt that a multimodal system which is considered just by increasing number of modalities by fusion would not yield the desired level of performance. Many alternate options for increased performance are presented.

Keywords

Multimodal Feature level Score level Decision level Fusion 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received Research Project Grant Funding from the Research Council of the Sultanate of Oman Research Grant Agreement No [ORG MoHE ICT 10 023].

References

  1. 1.
    Nandakumar, K., Jain, A.K., Ross, A.: Introduction to Biometrics. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ross, A., Jain, A.K., Prabhakar, S.: An introduction to biometric recognition. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol. 14, 44–48 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jain, A.K., Flynn, P.J., Ross, A.: Handbook of Biometrics. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kumar, A., Zhang, D.: Combining fingerprint, palmprint and hand-shape for user authentication. ICPR 4, 549–552 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Poh, N., Bourlai, T., Kittler, J., Allano, L., Alonso-Fernandez, F., Ambekar, O., Baker, J.P., Dorizzi, B., Fatukasi, O., Fiérrez-Aguilar, J., Ganster, H., Ortega-Garcia, J., Maurer, D.E., Ali Salah, A., Scheidat, T., Vielhauer, C.: Benchmarking quality-dependent and cost-sensitive score-level multimodal biometric fusion algorithms. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Sec. 4(4), 849–866 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nanni, L.: Lumini, Alessandra, Brahnam, Sheryl: likelihood ratio based features for a trained biometric score fusion. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(1), 58–63 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhatnagar, J., Kumar, A.: On estimating performance indices for biometric identification. Pattern Recognit. 42(9), 1803–1815 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Allano, L., Dorizzi, B., Garcia-Salicetti, S.: A new protocol for multi-biometric systems’ evaluation maintaining the dependencies between biometric scores. Pattern Recognit. 45(1), 119–127 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    He, M., Horng, S.-J., Fan, P., Run, R.-S., Chen, R.-J., Lai, J.-L.: Muhammad Khurram Khan, Kevin Octavius Sentosa: Performance evaluation of score level fusion in multimodal biometric systems. Pattern Recognit. 43(5), 1789–1800 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Geng, X.: Smith-Miles, K., Wang, L., Li, M., Qiang, W.: Context-aware fusion: a case study on fusion of gait and face for human identification in video. Pattern Recognit. 43(10), 3660–3673 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Imran, M.., Rao, A., Hemanthakumar, G.: Extreme subjectivity of multimodal biometrics solutions: role of strong and weak modalities/features information. In: Proceedings of IICAI 2011, pp. 1587–160Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kittler, J., Fumera, G., Roli, F., Muntoni, D.: An Experimental Comparison of Classifer Fusion Rules for Multimodal Personal Identity Verification System. Springer, Berlin (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yang, F., Ma, B.: A new mixed-mode biometrics information fusion based-on fingerprint, hand-geometry and palm-print. Fourth International Conference on Image and Graphics, 2007, ICIG 2007, 22–24 Aug 2007, pp. 689–693Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sim, T., Zhang, S., Janakiraman, R., Kumar, S.: Continuous verification using multimodal biometrics. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 29(4), 687–700 (April 2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rao, A., Noushath, S.: Subspace methods for face recognition. Comput. Sci. Rev. 4(1), 1–17 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ojansivu, V., Heikkila, J.: Blur insensitive texture classification using local phase quantization. In: ICISP, pp. 236, 243 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhu, L.-q., Zhang, S.-y.: Multimodal biometric identification system based on finger geometry, knuckle print and palm print. Pattern Recogn. Lett. 31(12), 1641–1649 (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Heenaye-Mamode Khan, M., Subramanian, R.K., Mamode Khan, N.A.: Low dimensional representation of dorsal hand vein features using principle component analysis (pca). World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 49, pp. 1001–1007 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Imran
    • 1
  • Ashok Rao
    • 2
  • S. Noushath
    • 3
  • G. Hemantha Kumar
    • 1
  1. 1.DoS in Computer ScienceUniversity of MysoreMysoreIndia
  2. 2.Freelance AcademicianMysoreIndia
  3. 3.Department of Information TechnologyCollege of Applied Sciences SoharSoharOman

Personalised recommendations