2018 3rd International Conference for Convergence in Technology (I2CT) 2018
DOI: 10.1109/i2ct.2018.8529519
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Speaker Recognition Techniques: A Review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
9
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…If they could get to the same level, they could work together with physical biometric modalities to increase security without yielding usability. There are several behavioral biometric modalities, such as voice recognition [4,5], handwritten signatures [6,7], key strokes [8,9], touch screen recognition [10,11], and gait recognition [12,13]. This article focuses on gait recognition, or the recognition of users as they walk.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If they could get to the same level, they could work together with physical biometric modalities to increase security without yielding usability. There are several behavioral biometric modalities, such as voice recognition [4,5], handwritten signatures [6,7], key strokes [8,9], touch screen recognition [10,11], and gait recognition [12,13]. This article focuses on gait recognition, or the recognition of users as they walk.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…FAR = 0.0%, FRR = 1.19% and ERR = 0.59% [48] Iris [49][50][51] Classification accuracy higher than 99.9%. FAR = 0,00001%, FRR = 0.1% [52] Retina [53,54] The true acceptance rate 98.148% [55] Face [56,57] FAR = 0,1%, FRR = 7% [52] Keystroke dynamics [58][59][60] Classification accuracy 92.60% [61] Signature dynamics [62,63] Average FAR = 5.125%, FRR = 5.5%, AER = 5.31% [64] Speech [65][66][67] Classification accuracy up to 99%. EER = 1% [68] The analysis of the presented values of the accuracy of authentication does not allow us to speak of a single use of features, however, it makes relevant their use within multimodal authentication (for example, face + iris [69], face and vein arrangement on finger, fingerprint, and voice [70], complex parameters of fingers and palms [71,72]) and the construction of ensembles of various types [73,74].…”
Section: Biometric Characteristic Papers Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are many feature engineering methods for SR. Short‐term spectral features are the most widely used owing to their effectiveness—MFCC features 48 . In this study, we also experimented with other features, such as the chromagram, mel‐scaled spectrogram, and tonal centroid features (Tonnetz).…”
Section: Architecture Of Security Layersmentioning
confidence: 99%