Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 391

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

An introduction evaluating biometric systems

Phillips, P.J., Martin, A., Wilson, C.L., Przybocki, M.·2000·Computer

Abstract

On the basis of media hype alone, you might conclude that biometric passwords will soon replace their alphanumeric counterparts with versions that cannot be stolen, forgotten, lost, or given to another person. But what if the actual performance of these systems falls short of the estimates? The authors designed this article to provide sufficient information to know what questions to ask when evaluating a biometric system, and to assist in determining whether performance levels meet the requirements of an application. For example, a low-performance biometric is probably sufficient for reducing-as opposed to eliminating-fraud. Likewise, completely replacing an existing security system with a biometric-based one may require a high-performance biometric system, or the required performance may be beyond what current technology can provide. Of the biometrics that give the user some control over data acquisition, voice, face, and fingerprint systems have undergone the most study and testing-and therefore occupy the bulk of this discussion. This article also covers the tools and techniques of biometric testing.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/2.820040

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 391

Metadata

Authors
Phillips, P. J., Martin, A., Wilson, C. L., & Przybocki, M.
Venue
Computer
Published
2000
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
56-63
ISSN
0018-9162 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2106256730
Cited by
391
References
0
FWCI
24.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An introduction evaluating biometric systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/2.820040
The paper
Phillips, P. J., Martin, A., Wilson, C. L., & Przybocki, M. (2000). An introduction evaluating biometric systems. Computer. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.820040

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.