The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison and combination of ear and face images in appearance-based biometrics
Abstract
Researchers have suggested that the ear may have advantages over the face for biometric recognition. Our previous experiments with ear and face recognition, using the standard principal component analysis approach, showed lower recognition performance using ear images. We report results of similar experiments on larger data sets that are more rigorously controlled for relative quality of face and ear images. We find that recognition performance is not significantly different between the face and the ear, for example, 70.5 percent versus 71.6 percent, respectively, in one experiment. We also find that multimodal recognition using both the ear and face results in statistically significant improvement over either individual biometric, for example, 90.9 percent in the analogous experiment.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The uniqueness in shape of the human pinna as led to its use as a biometric identifier (Iannarelli, 1989;Jain et al. 2004;Yan & Adviser-Bowyer, 2006) and this is often compared to face recognition (Victor et al. 2002;Chang et al. 2003).”
From An investigation of matching symmetry in the human pinnae with possible implications for 3D ear recognition and sound localization (2015) · cites this paper as Chang et al. 2003
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Iannarelli, 1989, Ear Identification, Forensic Identification Series
- 10.1007/0-306-47044-6_13 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0262-8856(02)00003-3 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICPR.2002.1044746 · DOI
- 10.1162/jocn.1991.3.1.71 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1109/34.879790 · DOI · Paper page
- Beveridge, Parametric and Nonparametric Methods for the Statistical Evaluation of Human ID Algorithms
- 10.1109/34.735803 · DOI
- Verlinde, Decision Fusion Using a Multi-Linear Classifier, 1, 47
- 10.1109/AFGR.2002.1004151 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A review of biometric technology along with trends and prospects
Unar, J. A., Seng, W. C., & Abbasi, A. (2014) · Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1016/j.patcog.2014.01.016 · Cited by 404
Employing fusion of learned and handcrafted features for unconstrained ear recognition
Hansley, E. E., Segundo, M. P., & Sarkar, S. (2018) · IET Biometrics · doi:10.1049/iet-bmt.2017.0210 · Cited by 90
Self-citationClaes, P., Reijniers, J., Shriver, M. D., Snyders, J., Suetens, P., Nielandt, J., De Tré, G., & Vandermeulen, D. (2015) · Journal of Anatomy · doi:10.1111/joa.12252 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Chang, K., Bowyer, K. W., Sarkar, S., & Victor, B.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
- Published
- 2003-09
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1160-1165
- ISSN
- 0162-8828
- 2160-9292
- Cited by
- 431
- References
- 0
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
