This Technical Report provides guidance on estimating how \u201cchallenging\u201c or \u201cstressing\u201c is an evaluation dataset for fingerprint recognition, based on relative sample quality, relative rotation, deformation, and overlap between impressions. In addition, this Technical Report establishes a method for construction of datasets of different levels of difficulty. This Technical Report defines the relative level of difficulty of a fingerprint dataset used in technology evaluation of fingerprint recognition algorithms. Level of difficulty is based on differences between reference and probe samples in the aformentioned factors. This Technical Report addresses such issues as:<\/p>\n
characterizing level of difficulty attributable to differences between samples acquired from the same finger,<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
developing statistical methodologies for representing the level of difficulty of a fingerprint dataset by aggregating influencing factors,<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
comparing the level of difficulty of different fingerprint datasets,<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
defining procedures for testing and reporting the level of difficulty of fingerprint datasets collected for technology evaluation,<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
analysing mated pair data characteristics based on comparison scores,<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
describing the archived data selection methodology for building a dataset for evaluation.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
This Technical Report provides guidelines for comparing the relative level of difficulty of fingerprint datasets.<\/p>\n
Outside the scope of this Technical Report are:<\/p>\n
defining the quality of individual fingerprint images,<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
defining the methodologies or explicit measures for evaluating or predicting the performance of fingerprint recognition algorithms.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
| PDF Pages<\/th>\n | PDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6<\/td>\n | Foreword <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 7<\/td>\n | Introduction <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 9<\/td>\n | Section sec_1 Section sec_2 Section sec_2.1 Section sec_2.2 1\tScope 2\tTerms and definitions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 10<\/td>\n | Section sec_2.3 Section sec_2.4 Section sec_2.5 Section sec_2.6 Section sec_2.7 Section sec_2.8 Section sec_2.9 Section sec_2.10 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 11<\/td>\n | Section sec_2.11 Section sec_2.12 Section sec_2.13 Section sec_2.14 Section sec_2.15 Section sec_2.16 Section sec_2.17 Section sec_2.18 Section sec_2.19 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 12<\/td>\n | Section sec_2.20 Section sec_3 Section sec_4 Section sec_4.1 3\tSymbols and abbreviated terms 4\tDifferential factors in fingerprint samples 4.1\tGeneral <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 13<\/td>\n | Figure fig_1 Figure fig_2 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 14<\/td>\n | Section sec_4.2 Section sec_4.2.1 Figure fig_3 4.2\tCommon area <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 15<\/td>\n | Figure fig_4 Section sec_4.2.2 Section sec_4.2.3 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 16<\/td>\n | Figure fig_5 Figure fig_6 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 17<\/td>\n | Figure fig_7 Section sec_4.2.4 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 18<\/td>\n | Figure fig_8 Section sec_4.2.5 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 19<\/td>\n | Figure fig_9 Section sec_4.3 Section sec_4.3.1 4.3\tRelative deformation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 20<\/td>\n | Section sec_4.3.2 Figure fig_10 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 21<\/td>\n | Figure fig_11 Figure fig_12 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 22<\/td>\n | Figure fig_13 Figure fig_14 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 23<\/td>\n | Section sec_4.3.3 Section sec_4.3.4 Figure fig_15 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 24<\/td>\n | Section sec_4.4 Section sec_4.4.1 Section sec_4.4.2 Section sec_4.5 Section sec_4.5.1 Section sec_4.5.2 4.4\tRelative sample quality 4.5\tCalculating LOD of a dataset <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 25<\/td>\n | Figure fig_16 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 26<\/td>\n | Figure fig_17 Figure fig_18 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 27<\/td>\n | Figure fig_19 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 28<\/td>\n | Table tab_1 Figure fig_20 Section sec_5 Section sec_5.1 5\tAnalysis of mated pair data characteristics based on comparison results 5.1\tGeneral <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 29<\/td>\n | Section sec_5.2 Section sec_5.2.1 Section sec_5.2.2 Section sec_5.2.3 5.2\tMatchability <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 30<\/td>\n | Table tab_2 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 31<\/td>\n | Section sec_5.2.4 Section sec_5.3 5.3\tBuilding datasets of different levels of difficulty <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 32<\/td>\n | Figure fig_21 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 33<\/td>\n | Figure fig_22 Figure fig_23 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 34<\/td>\n | Figure fig_24 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 35<\/td>\n | Figure fig_25 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 36<\/td>\n | Reference ref_1 Reference ref_2 Reference ref_3 Reference ref_4 Reference ref_5 Reference ref_6 Reference ref_7 Reference ref_8 Reference ref_9 Reference ref_10 Reference ref_11 Reference ref_12 Reference ref_13 Reference ref_14 Reference ref_15 Reference ref_16 Bibliography <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Information technology. Biometrics. Characterization and measurement of difficulty for fingerprint databases for technology evaluation<\/b><\/p>\n |