2022
DOI: 10.1155/2022/4965908
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative Analysis of Dynamic Characteristics between Electronic Signature and Conventional Signature Based on Computer Vision Technology

Abstract: During the last two or three decades where innovations in technology have been dominant, especially the rapid development of electronic information technology, various types of electronic devices have been developed for different application areas. It is this technological-assisted equipment that has drastic effects on the lifestyle of every creature in general and human beings in particular. In addition to the other activities or services, technology has enabled human beings to write on electronic devices, wh… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The international community of forensic scientists has conducted extensive research on the similarities and distinctions between handwritten electronic signatures and handwritten paper-based signatures [2][3][4]. Findings indicate significant differences in the dynamic features of handwritten electronic signatures compared with their traditional counterpart.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The international community of forensic scientists has conducted extensive research on the similarities and distinctions between handwritten electronic signatures and handwritten paper-based signatures [2][3][4]. Findings indicate significant differences in the dynamic features of handwritten electronic signatures compared with their traditional counterpart.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi, as publisher, following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [ 1 ]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of systematic manipulation of the publication and peer-review process.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%