2009 Innovative Technologies in Intelligent Systems and Industrial Applications 2009
DOI: 10.1109/citisia.2009.5224240
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

ANOVA-based feature analysis and selection in HMM-based offline signature verification system

Abstract: This paper presents an analysis performance of different features in distinguishing between genuine and forged signatures for HMM based offline signature verification systems. The four offline features include pixel density, centre of gravity, distance and angle. All features considered are local in nature. The analysis technique used here is based on analysis of variance (ANOVA). Experimental results show that the combination of center of gravity and pixel density features are good for distinguishing between … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A False Acceptance rate of 2.83% is obtained and a False Rejection rate of 1.44%, 2.50%, and 22.67% are obtained for random, casual, and skilled forgeries, respectively. Some techniques involving off-line signature verification based on HMM are described in [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32].…”
Section: Different Methods For Off-line Signature Verification Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A False Acceptance rate of 2.83% is obtained and a False Rejection rate of 1.44%, 2.50%, and 22.67% are obtained for random, casual, and skilled forgeries, respectively. Some techniques involving off-line signature verification based on HMM are described in [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32].…”
Section: Different Methods For Off-line Signature Verification Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to select the optimal features, the combination of the IFS method and different feature selection methods will be introduced. Meanwhile, in order to clearly reflect the superiority of the LightGBM feature selection method, we also use ReliefF [ 50 ], LinearSVR [ 51 ], XGBoost [ 52 ], and ANOVA [ 53 ] to find the optimal feature subset.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many studies have focused on statistical features like image statistics, analysis of variance [16,17], and mean and median [18]. Handwriting feature like position, velocity, acceleration, and pressure were analyzed in Reference [17].…”
Section: Of 25mentioning
confidence: 99%