arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2310.04541cs.CV

虹膜活体检测竞赛(LivDet-Iris)——2023届

Iris Liveness Detection Competition (LivDet-Iris) -- The 2023 Edition

University of Notre Dame(圣母大学);Clarkson University(克拉克森大学);Hochschule Darmstadt (HDA)(达姆施塔特应用科学大学(HDA));IDVisionCenter(ID视觉中心);Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture (BUCEA)(北京建筑大学(BUCEA))
Patrick Tinsley, Sandip Purnapatra, Mahsa Mitcheff, Aidan Boyd, Colton Crum, Kevin Bowyer, Patrick Flynn, Stephanie Schuckers, Adam Czajka, Meiling Fang, Naser … 展开作者

Patrick Tinsley, Sandip Purnapatra, Mahsa Mitcheff, Aidan Boyd, Colton Crum, Kevin Bowyer, Patrick Flynn, Stephanie Schuckers, Adam Czajka, Meiling Fang, Naser Damer, Xingyu Liu, Caiyong Wang, Xianyun Sun, Zhaohua Chang, Xinyue Li, Guangzhe Zhao, Juan Tapia, Christoph Busch, Carlos Aravena, Daniel Schulz

AI总结:

2023届LivDet虹膜呈现攻击检测竞赛新增GAN生成虹膜PAI类别与人类检测基准,多机构提交8种算法,结果显示虹膜PAD仍具挑战性。

摘要:

本文介绍了“LivDet”系列虹膜呈现攻击检测(PAD)竞赛2023届的结果。本届是该系列的第五届竞赛,新增内容包括:(1)将GAN生成的虹膜图像作为一类呈现攻击工具(PAI);(2)评估人类检测PAI的准确率作为参考基准。克拉克森大学和圣母大学为竞赛提供了图像数据集(包含7类不同PAI的样本)以及基线PAD算法。弗劳恩霍夫IGD研究所、北京建筑大学和达姆施塔特应用技术大学共提交了8种PAD算法的竞赛结果。研究按不同PAI类型分析了准确率结果,并与人类准确率进行了对比。总体而言,弗劳恩霍夫IGD研究所采用基于注意力的像素级二值监督网络的算法取得了最优加权准确率结果(平均分类错误率为37.31%);而在为每类PAI赋予相等权重时,北京建筑大学的算法表现最佳(平均分类率为22.15%)。这些结果表明,虹膜PAD仍然是一个具有挑战性的问题。

英文摘要:

This paper describes the results of the 2023 edition of the ''LivDet'' series of iris presentation attack detection (PAD) competitions. New elements in this fifth competition include (1) GAN-generated iris images as a category of presentation attack instruments (PAI), and (2) an evaluation of human accuracy at detecting PAI as a reference benchmark. Clarkson University and the University of Notre Dame contributed image datasets for the competition, composed of samples representing seven different PAI categories, as well as baseline PAD algorithms. Fraunhofer IGD, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, and Hochschule Darmstadt contributed results for a total of eight PAD algorithms to the competition. Accuracy results are analyzed by different PAI types, and compared to human accuracy. Overall, the Fraunhofer IGD algorithm, using an attention-based pixel-wise binary supervision network, showed the best-weighted accuracy results (average classification error rate of 37.31%), while the Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture's algorithm won when equal weights for each PAI were given (average classification rate of 22.15%). These results suggest that iris PAD is still a challenging problem.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑