2022
DOI: 10.24132/csrn.3201.3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An improved simple feature set for face presentation attack detection

Abstract: Presentation attacks are weak points of facial biometrical authentication systems. Although several presentation attack detection methods were developed, the best of them require a sufficient amount of training data and rely on computationally intensive deep learning based features. Thus, most of them have difficulties with adaptation to new types of presentation attacks or new cameras. In this paper, we introduce a method for face presentation attack detection with low requirements for training data and high … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Reference [5] showcased the RDWT-Haralick-SVM algorithm achieving an ACER of 3.44%, while the MC-CNN method obtained 0.3% ACER using the CDIT metric. Meanwhile, reference [7] reported an ACER of 2.91% with a dataset of 1679 images and 1.18% with 83,950 images. Nevertheless, the proposed method demonstrated superior performance compared to these results, as presented in Table 3.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Reference [5] showcased the RDWT-Haralick-SVM algorithm achieving an ACER of 3.44%, while the MC-CNN method obtained 0.3% ACER using the CDIT metric. Meanwhile, reference [7] reported an ACER of 2.91% with a dataset of 1679 images and 1.18% with 83,950 images. Nevertheless, the proposed method demonstrated superior performance compared to these results, as presented in Table 3.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These CNN architectures will provide positive outcomes for FAS in many scenarios. These results will be compared with the outcomes of papers [5], [7], revealing that the current findings exhibit superior performance. Subsequently, the results of all modalities will be combined using different techniques, such as majority voting [8], weighted voting [9], average/pooling [10], and stacking classifiers [11].…”
mentioning
confidence: 89%