False alarm rate: a critical performance measure for face recognition

The performance of a face recognition algorithm is typically characterised by correct identification rate under the closed-world assumption. To be of greatest practical use, the closed-world assumption must be relaxed and the classifier used both for detection and identification. It is put forward that for open-world applications, the false alarm rate of the classifier is at least as important as the identification rate. Under a repeated verification model, all face recognisers exhibit a rapid non-linear increase in false alarm rate with the false alarm rate of the one-to-one verification used. If the one-to-one false alarm rate is not strictly controlled, the overall classifier are unusable. A method is presented to predict the false alarm rate of a large gallery classifier using only a small data set. It is then shown that the false alarm error rate is always greater than the identification error rate. Therefore the false alarm rate is a more difficult criterion to minimise when designing a classifier.

[1]  P. Jonathon Phillips,et al.  Face recognition vendor test 2002 , 2003, 2003 IEEE International SOI Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.03CH37443).

[2]  Joachim M. Buhmann,et al.  Distortion Invariant Object Recognition in the Dynamic Link Architecture , 1993, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[3]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification , 1973 .

[4]  Aaron F. Bobick,et al.  Using similarity scores from a small gallery to estimate recognition performance for larger galleries , 2003, 2003 IEEE International SOI Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.03CH37443).

[5]  Harry Wechsler,et al.  The FERET database and evaluation procedure for face-recognition algorithms , 1998, Image Vis. Comput..

[6]  M. Turk,et al.  Eigenfaces for Recognition , 1991, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[7]  P. Jonathon Phillips,et al.  Meta-analysis of face recognition algorithms , 2001, Proceedings of Fifth IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face Gesture Recognition.

[8]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Beyond eigenfaces: probabilistic matching for face recognition , 1998, Proceedings Third IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition.

[9]  P. Jonathon Phillips,et al.  Face Recognition Vendor Test 2002 Performance Metrics , 2003, AVBPA.

[10]  John Daugman,et al.  The importance of being random: statistical principles of iris recognition , 2003, Pattern Recognit..

[11]  Shigeo Abe DrEng Pattern Classification , 2001, Springer London.

[12]  David J. Kriegman,et al.  Eigenfaces vs. Fisherfaces: Recognition Using Class Specific Linear Projection , 1996, ECCV.