21.02.2013 Views

Advances in Fingerprint Technology.pdf

Advances in Fingerprint Technology.pdf

Advances in Fingerprint Technology.pdf

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Table 8.2 shows the results of the f<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>t classification algorithm on<br />

the NIST-4 database which conta<strong>in</strong>s 4000 images (image size is 512 × 480)<br />

taken from 2000 different f<strong>in</strong>gers, 2 images per f<strong>in</strong>ger. Five f<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>t classes<br />

are def<strong>in</strong>ed: (1) arch, (2) tented arch, (3) left loop, (4) right loop, and (5)<br />

whorl. F<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> this database are uniformly distributed among these<br />

five classes (800 per class). The five-class error rate <strong>in</strong> classify<strong>in</strong>g these 4000<br />

f<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>ts is 12.5%. The confusion matrix is given <strong>in</strong> Table 8.2; numbers<br />

shown <strong>in</strong> bold font are correct classifications. Because a number of f<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

<strong>in</strong> the NIST-4 database are labeled as belong<strong>in</strong>g to possibly more than<br />

one class, each row of the confusion matrix <strong>in</strong> Table 8.2 does not sum up to<br />

800. For the five-class problem, most of the classification errors are due to<br />

misclassify<strong>in</strong>g a tented arch as an arch. By comb<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g these two categories <strong>in</strong>to<br />

a s<strong>in</strong>gle class, the four-class error rate drops from 12.5% to 7.7%. In addition<br />

to the tented arch-arch errors, the errors primarily result from misclassifications<br />

between arch/tented arch and loops and from poor image quality.<br />

F<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>t Match<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Table 8.2 Five-Class Classification Results<br />

on the NIST-4 Database; A = Arch, T = Tented<br />

Arch, L = Left Loop, R = Right Loop, W = Whorl<br />

Assigned Class<br />

True Class A T L R W<br />

A 885 13 10 11 0<br />

T 179 384 54 14 5<br />

L 31 27 755 3 20<br />

R 30 47 3 717 16<br />

W 6 1 15 15 759<br />

From Ja<strong>in</strong>, A.K. and Pankanti, S. F<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>t classification and<br />

match<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong> A. Bovik, Ed., Handbook for Image and Video<br />

Process<strong>in</strong>g, ©Academic Press, April 2000. With permission.<br />

Given two (test and template) representations, the match<strong>in</strong>g module determ<strong>in</strong>es<br />

whether the pr<strong>in</strong>ts are impressions of the same f<strong>in</strong>ger. The match<strong>in</strong>g<br />

phase typically def<strong>in</strong>es a metric of the similarity between two f<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>t<br />

representations. It also def<strong>in</strong>es a threshold to decide whether or not a given<br />

pair of representations belongs to the same f<strong>in</strong>ger (mated pair).<br />

Only <strong>in</strong> the highly constra<strong>in</strong>ed systems (see, for example, Reference 41) and<br />

situations could one assume that the test and template f<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>ts depict the<br />

same portion of the f<strong>in</strong>ger and that both are aligned (<strong>in</strong> terms of displacement<br />

from the orig<strong>in</strong> of the imag<strong>in</strong>g coord<strong>in</strong>ate system and of their orientations) with

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!