An Experimental Analysis of the Relationship between Biometric Template Update and the Doddington's Zoo: A Case Study in Face Verification

The problem of biometric template representativeness has recently attracted much attention with the introduction of several template update methods. Automatic template update methods adapt themselves to the intra-class variations of the input data. However, it is possible to hypothesize that the effect of template updating may not be the same for all the clients due to different characteristics of clients present in the biometric database. The goal of this paper is to investigate this hypothesis by explicitly partitioning clients into different groups of the "Doddington's zoo" as a function of their "intrinsic" characteristics, and studying the effect of state of art template "self update" procedure on these different groups. Experimental evaluation on Equinox database with a case study on face verification system based on EBGM algorithm shows the strong evidence of non-uniform update effects on different clients classes and suggest to modify the update procedures according to the client's characteristics.

[1]  Douglas A. Reynolds,et al.  SHEEP, GOATS, LAMBS and WOLVES A Statistical Analysis of Speaker Performance in the NIST 1998 Speaker Recognition Evaluation , 1998 .

[2]  Xudong Jiang,et al.  Online Fingerprint Template Improvement , 2002, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[3]  Stan Z. Li,et al.  Advances in Biometrics, International Conference, ICB 2007, Seoul, Korea, August 27-29, 2007, Proceedings , 2007, ICB.

[4]  Gian Luca Marcialis,et al.  Adaptive Biometric Systems That Can Improve with Use , 2008 .

[5]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Template Adaptation based Fingerprint Verification , 2006, 18th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR'06).

[6]  Gian Luca Marcialis,et al.  Template Co-update in Multimodal Biometric Systems , 2007, ICB.

[7]  Gian Luca Marcialis,et al.  Capturing large intra-class variations of biometric data by template co-updating , 2008, 2008 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops.

[8]  Arun Ross,et al.  Handbook of Biometrics , 2007 .

[9]  Tsuhan Chen,et al.  Eigenspace updating for non-stationary process and its application to face recognition , 2003, Pattern Recognit..

[10]  Norbert Krüger,et al.  Face recognition by elastic bunch graph matching , 1997, Proceedings of International Conference on Image Processing.

[11]  Edwin R. Hancock,et al.  Structural, Syntactic, and Statistical Pattern Recognition, Joint IAPR International Workshop, SSPR&SPR 2010, Cesme, Izmir, Turkey, August 18-20, 2010. Proceedings , 2010, SSPR/SPR.

[12]  Gian Luca Marcialis,et al.  Semi-supervised PCA-Based Face Recognition Using Self-training , 2006, SSPR/SPR.

[13]  Norbert Krüger,et al.  Face Recognition by Elastic Bunch Graph Matching , 1997, CAIP.

[14]  Arun Ross,et al.  Biometric template selection and update: a case study in fingerprints , 2004, Pattern Recognit..

[15]  J. Kittler,et al.  A methodology for separating sheep from goats for controlled enrollment and multimodal fusion , 2008, 2008 Biometrics Symposium.

[16]  Gian Luca Marcialis,et al.  Biometric Template Update: An Experimental Investigation on the Relationship between Update Errors and Performance Degradation in Face Verification , 2008, SSPR/SPR.

[17]  Craig I. Watson,et al.  The myth of goats :: how many people have fingerprints that are hard to match? , 2005 .