Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Fingerprint Presentation Attack Detection: Generalization and Efficiency

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1812.11574 v1 pith:73IQ2WO6 submitted 2018-12-30 cs.CV

classification cs.CV
keywords fingerprintmaterialsattackbusterdetectiongeneralizationlatexnamely
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We study the problem of fingerprint presentation attack detection (PAD) under unknown PA materials not seen during PAD training. A dataset of 5,743 bonafide and 4,912 PA images of 12 different materials is used to evaluate a state-of-the-art PAD, namely Fingerprint Spoof Buster. We utilize 3D t-SNE visualization and clustering of material characteristics to identify a representative set of PA materials that cover most of PA feature space. We observe that a set of six PA materials, namely Silicone, 2D Paper, Play Doh, Gelatin, Latex Body Paint and Monster Liquid Latex provide a good representative set that should be included in training to achieve generalization of PAD. We also propose an optimized Android app of Fingerprint Spoof Buster that can run on a commodity smartphone (Xiaomi Redmi Note 4) without a significant drop in PAD performance (from TDR = 95.7% to 95.3% @ FDR = 0.2%) which can make a PA prediction in less than 300ms.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools