Fingerprint Recognition

Future Directions

Salil Prabhakar Digital Persona Inc.

Fingerprint Applications

Commercial
Computer Network Logon, Electronic Data Security, E-Commerce, Internet Access, ATM, Credit Card, Physical Access Control, Cellular Phones Personal Digital Assistant, Medical Records, Distance Leaning, etc.

Government
National ID card, Correctional Facilities, Drivers License, Social Security, Welfare Disbursement, Border Control, Passport Control, etc.

Forensic
Corpse Identification Criminal Investigation, Terrorist Identification, Parenthood determination, Missing Children, etc.

Fingerprint Application Functionality

s Positive Identification
Is this person truly know to the system Commercial applications (network logon) Desirable: low cost and user-friendly

s Large Scale Identification

Is this person in the database Government and Forensic applications (prevent double dipping; multiple passports) Desirable: high throughput with little human intervention

s Surveillance and Screening

Is this a wanted person Airport watch list Fingerprints are not suitable

Challenges
s To design a system that would operate on the extremes of all three axis simultaneously
Scale
1010

105
101 Unusable Hard to Use Easy to use 90% 99% 99.9999%

Accuracy

Usability

Reasons for Accuracy Challenges

s Information Limitation
Due to individuality, poor presentation, and inconsistent acquisition

s Representation Limitation
Design and choice of representation (features) and quality of feature extraction algorithms (especially for poor quality fingerprints)

s Invariance Limitation
Incorrect modeling of invariant relationships among features

Fingerprint Individuality Estimation

Accuracy; Information Limitation

s Assumptions for theoretical individuality estimation

consider only minutiae (ending and bifurcation) features minutiae locations and directions are independent minutiae locations are uniformly distributed correspondence of a minutiae pair is an independent event quality is not explicitly taken into account ridge frequency is assumes to be constant across population and spatially uniform in the same finger analysis of matching of different impressions of the same finger binds the parameters of the probability of matching prints from different fingers an alignment between two fingerprints has been established

Probability of a False Correspondence

Accuracy; Information Limitation; Fingerprint Individuality Estimation
s s s s s s

m = no. of minutiae in template n = no. of minutiae in input = no. of corresponding minutiae based on location (x,y) alone q = no. of corresponding minutiae based on location and direction () A = area of overlap between input and template C = area of tolerance region = r02/A

Probability that one of one input minutiae matches any of the m template minutiae:

mC A
Probability that two of two input minutiae matches any of the m template minutiae: mC A mC
2x

A C

Probability of a False Correspondence

Accuracy; Information Limitation; Fingerprint Individuality Estimation

Probability that 1 of n input minutiae matches any of the m template minutiae:

p (A , C , m , n , ) =

n mC 1 A

A mC A C

Probability that q of n input minutiae match any q of the m template minutiae:

p (A , C , m , n , ) =

A mC A C

n mC (m 1)C ... (m 1)C A A C A ( 1)C A (m 1)C A (m (n + 1))C ... . A ( + 1)C A (n 1)C

This finally reduces to:

p (M , C , m , n , ) =

m M m n where M M n

A C

Probability of a False Correspondence

Accuracy; Information Limitation; Fingerprint Individuality Estimation

Let l be such that P(min(|i- j|,360-|i- j|) 0) =l. Then,

m M m min( m ,n ) n A q q p (M , m , n , q ) = (l ) (1 l ) , where M q C M =q n
Finally, since minutiae can lie only on ridges, i.e., along a curve of length A/w, where w is the ridge-period, M is modified as:

A /w M where 2r0 is the length tolerance in minutia location. 2r0

Upper Bound on Fingerprint Accuracy

Accuracy; Information Limitation; Fingerprint Individuality Estimation

Theoretical
M,m,n,q 248, 46, 46, 46 248, 46, 46, 12 70, 12, 12, 12 P(Correspondence) 1.33 x 10-77 5.86 x 10-7 1.22 x 10-20

Empirical
Database MSU_DBI m,n,q 46, 46, 12 P(Correspondence) 5.8 x 10-2

The probabilities of false correspondences for various values of q are computed from our theoretical model based on the parameters estimated from a Ground Truth database and the MSU_DBI databases and compared with the empirical probability of false correspondence obtained from the MSU_DBI database using an automatic fingerprint matcher. The entry (70, 12, 12, 12) corresponds to the 12-point guideline.

Lower Bound on Fingerprint Accuracy

Accuracy; Information Limitation; Fingerprint Individuality Estimation

Quantify the genetic similarity in fingerprint images

Twin-twin minutiae matching

Same-fingerprint-type matching

Information Limitation: Conclusion

Accuracy; Information Limitation

There is an incredible amount of information content in fingerprints A minutiae-based fingerprint identification system can distinguish between identical twins The performance of state-of-the-art automatic fingerprint matchers do not even come close to the theoretical performance Performance of fingerprint matcher is depended on the fingerprint class and thus may depend upon target population Fingerprint classification may not be very effective in genetically related population Fingerprint identification accuracy may suffer in certain demographics

Fingerprint Representation
Accuracy; Representation Limitation

Ideal representation would maximize the inter-class variability and minimize the intra-class variability

Fingerprints from the same finger Minutiae-based representation may not be most suitable

Fingerprints from two different fingers Ridge feature-based representation may not be most suitable

Fingerprint Representation
Accuracy; Representation Limitation

Quality Index = 0.96 False Minutiae=0

Quality Index = 0.53 False Minutiae=7

Quality Index = 0.04 False Minutiae=27

Conventional Representations
Accuracy; Representation Limitation

Minutiae-based
Sequential design based on the following modules: Segmentation, local ridge orientation estimation (singularity and more detection), local ridge frequency estimation, fingerprint enhancement, minutiae detection, and minutiae filtering and post-processing.

Ridge Feature-based
Size and shape of fingerprint, number, type, and position of singularities (cores and deltas), spatial relationship and geometrical attributes of the ridge lines, shape features, global and local texture information, sweat pores, fractal features.

Representations: Future Directions

Accuracy; Representation Limitation

Improvement of current representations through robust and reliable domain-specific image processing techniques such as:
Model-based orientation field estimation Robust image enhancement and masking

New richer representations Fusion of various representations

Fingerprint Invariance
Accuracy; Invariance Limitation

Ideal matcher would perfectly model the invariant relationship in different impressions of the same finger

Two good quality fingerprint images from the same finger A fingerprint matching algorithm that assumes a rigid transformation will be unable to match

Minutiae Matching
Accuracy; Invariance Limitation

Given two sets of minutiae points:

where x, y, and q are the x-coordinate, y-coordinate, and minutiae direction. No point correspondence is known a priori Nonlinear deformation between point sets Spurious minutiae and missing minutiae Errors in minutiae position and minutiae direction

(( Q = (( x

P P P P = x1P , y1P ,1P , , xM , y M , M Q 1

, y1Q ,1Q

) ( ), , ( x

Q N

Q Q , y N , N

)) ))

s s s s

Matching: Future Directions

Accuracy; Invariance Limitation

Alignment remains a difficult problem develop alignment techniques that remain robust under the presence of false features Understand and model fingerprint deformation Fusion of various matchers (based on the same or different representations)

Scale
s

1:N Identification is a much harder problem (N large)

Accuracy Speed

Traditionally: classify fingerprint into one of the few (4 or so) predefined fingerprint types Problem: too few distinct bins; uneven natural distribution into these bins; many ambiguous fingerprints (17% NIST4 has two labels)

a)

b)

c)

Scale: Future Directions

s s

Continuous classification Feature-based indexing (search and retrieval) schemes (e.g., minutiae triplets) Fast matchers Classifier combination
70
Penet ration (%)

s s

60 50

minutiae triplets

orientation image

40 30 20 10 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Error (%) Combination FingerCode

Multiple Biometrics; Fusion

s

A decision (and lower) level fusion of multiple biometrics can improve performance In identification systems, fusion can also improve speed Independence among modalities is key Even combination of correlated modalities can be no worse than the best performing modality alone Best combination scheme would be application dependent

Performance Evaluation
s s

Evaluation types: technology, scenario, operational Dependent on composition of the population (occupation, age, demographics, race), the environment, the system operational mode, etc Ideally, characterize the application-independent performance in laboratory and predict technology, scenario, and operational performances Standardization and independent testing Parametric and non-parametric estimation confidence intervals and database size of

s s

Parametric and non-parametric and statistical modeling of inter-class and intra-class variations;

Usability, Security, Privacy

s s

Biometrics are not secrets and not revocable Encryption, secure system design, and liveness detection solve this problem Unintended functional scope; unintended application scope; covert acquisition Legislation; self-regulation; independent regulatory organizations Biometric Cryptosystems: fingerprint fuzzy vault
Alignment Similarity metric in encrypted domain Variable and unordered representation Performance loss; ROC remains the bottleneck