Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Beyond objective performance evaluation in multimodal biometric systems

Au-Delà D’une Évaluation Objective de la Performance Dans Les Systèmes Biométriques Multimodaux

  • Multimodal Biometrics
  • Published:
Annales Des Télécommunications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Biometric identity verification is a reality today. However, this relatively new field still requires a large amount of user-centred studies before becoming commonly used.

This paper presents a user-centred analysis of a multimodal authentication system for secure Internet access where users can choose freely between three different biometric modalities (fingerprint, voice and signature) to enrol, verify their identity and act as impostors in an unsupervised manner, aided only by an automated embodied conversational agent.

Objective and subjective information was collected to analyse relevant relationships between authentication performance, ergonomie issues and user preconceptions and impressions. Particular attention has been paid to analyse also the evolution of users’ choices of modality. From the results of our study we infer usability insights for the design of multimodal biometric security systems, and point towards directions of further inquiry.

Résumé

Aujourd’hui l’authentification de l’identité grâce à la biométrique est une réalité. Cependant, cette technologie, relativement récente, requiert une grande quantitée d’études centrées sur l’utilisateur avant de pouvoir être communément utilisée.

Cet article, basé sur une étude de l’utilisateur, présente l’analyse d’un système multimodal d’authentification pour l’accès sécurisé à l’Internet, où les utilisateurs peuvent choisir librement parmis trois modalités biométriques différentes (l’empreinte digitale, la voix et la signature) pour s’inscrire, vérifier leurs identités et agir en tant qu ’imposteurs, sans personnel d’encadrement mais avec l’aide d’un agent conversationnel animé.

Des informations objectives et subjectives ont été recueillies afin d’analyser les relations entre les performances d’authentification, l’ergonomie et les avis de l’utilisateur. Nous avons analysé aussi l’évolution des choix de modalité des utilisateurs. Nous déduirons des idées pour la conception des systèmes biométriques multimodaux de sécurité, et l’orientation d’études plus approfondies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Berk R., Freedman D.A. (2001), Statistical Assumptions as Empirical Commitments. Department of Statistics, UCLA. Department of Statistics Papers, Paper 2001080101, 22nd August 2001, http://repositories.cdlib.org/uclastat/papers/2001080101 (Accessed: 28th March 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  2. BioSec (2003), BioSec: Biometrics and Security, http://www.biosec.org/

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bio Vision (2003), Roadmap for Biometrics in Europe to 2010 Available: http://www.eubiometricsforum.com/dmdocuments/Biovision_Roadmap.pdf (Accessed:, 27th July 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bknc (2003), A Biometric Research Agenda and the Course of Biometrics Research, International Conference on Biometric Authentication, Biometrie Knowledge Centre, West Virginia University, http://www.wvu.edu/~bknc/BiometricResearchAgenda.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brunelli R., Falavigna D. (1995), Person identification using multiple cues, IEEE Transactions on PAMI, 12, n° 10, pp. 955–966, October 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Campbell J. P. (1997), Speaker Recognition: A Tutorial, Proceedings of the IEEE, 85, n° 9, September 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cic (2004), iSign for Java, Communication Intelligence Corporation, http://www.cic.com/products/isign/#iSignJava

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cohen J. (1998), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd Ed), Hillsdatle, NJ, Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Doddington G., Liggett W., Martin A., Przybocki M., Reynolds D. (1998), Sheep, goats, lambs and wolves: A statistical analysis of speaker performance in the NIST 1998 speaker recognition evaluation. ICSLP, November 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Friedman B., Howe D.C., Felten E. (2002), Informed Consent in the Mozilla Browser: Implementing Value-Sensitive Design, Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Available at: http://www.ischool.washington.edu/networksecurity/outcomes.html (Accessed: 27th July 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gish H., Schmidt M. (1994), Text-Independent Speaker Identification, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, October 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Haptek (2004), Haptek, http://www.haptek.com/

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hitachi (2002). Standarization of accuracy evaluation for biometric authentication in Japan. Available at: http://www.sdl.hitachi.co.jp/ipa_biotest/english/index_english.html (Accessed: 27th July 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hoyle R. H. Ed. (1999), Statistical Strategies for Small Sample Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Iso/iec jtc 1/sc 37 19795-1 (2006), Biometrie Performance Testing and Reporting, Part 1: Test Principles. American National Standards Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lenth R.V. (2001), Some Practical Guidelines for Effective Sample Size Determination, The American Statistician, 55, n° 3, pp. 187–193, 2001.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Matyas V., Riha Z. (2002), Biometrie Authentication — Security and Usability, Proceedings of the Communications and Multimedia Security Conference. Available at: http://www.fi.muni.cz/usr/matyas/cms_matyas_riha_biometrics.pdf (Accessed: 27th July 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nielsen J., Landauer T.R. (1993), A Mathematical Model of the Finding of Usability Problems, Proceedings of InterCHI, 1993, pp. 206–213.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nuance (2004), Nuance Communications Inc, http://www.nuance.com

    Google Scholar 

  20. Patric A.S. (2004), Usability and Acceptability of Biometrie Security Systems, Proceedings of the Financial Cryptography Conference (FC04), West FL.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Poh N., Bengio S., Korczak J., A Multi-sample Multi-source Model for Biometrie Authentication, IEEE International Workshop on Neural Networks for Signal Processing (NNSP), 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Precise Biometrics (2004), Precise Biometrics, http://www.precisebiometrics.com/

    Google Scholar 

  23. Sasse M.A. (2004), Usability and trust in information systems. Cyber Trust & Crime Prevention Project. University College London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Scheuermann D., Schwiderski-Grosche S., Struif B. (2000), Usability of Biometrics in Relation to Electronic Signatures, EU Study 502533/8. GMD-German National Research Center for Information Technology, Institute for Secure Telecooperation (SIT).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Seymour R., Powel D. (2000), Better Design — The Burglar Alarm, http://www.designcouncil.info/betterbydesign/security/challenge.html (Accessed: 27th July 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Uitenbroek D.G. (1997), SISA: Simple Interactive Statistical Analysis, Available: http://home.clara.net/sisa/ (Accessed: 14th July 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Uk Passport Service (2005), Biometrics Enrolment Trial Report. Available: http://www.passport.gov.uk/downloads/UKPSBiometrics_Enrolment_Trial_Report.pdf (Accessed: 5th March 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  28. VanVoorhis C.W., Morgan B.L. (2001), Statistical Rules of Thumb: What We Don’t Want to Forget About Sample Sizes, Psi Chi Journal, Issue 4, Available: http://www.psichi.org/pubs/articles/article_182.asp (Accessed: 28th March 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zimmermann P.R. (1995), The Official PGP User’s Guide, Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ATVS, Escuela Politécnica Superior, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid — Ciudad Universitaria de Cantoblanco, Avda Francisco Tomas y Valiente 11, 28049, Madrid, Spain

    Doroteo T. Toledano

  2. Grupo de Aplicaciones de Procesado de Señal, Departamento de Señales, Sistemas y Radiocomunicaciones, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria s/n, 28040, Madrid, Spain

    Álvaro Hernández Trapote, David Díaz Pardo de Vera, Rubén Fernández Pozo & Luis Hernández Gómez

Authors
  1. Doroteo T. Toledano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Álvaro Hernández Trapote
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Díaz Pardo de Vera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rubén Fernández Pozo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Luis Hernández Gómez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Toledano, D.T., Hernández Trapote, Á., Díaz Pardo de Vera, D. et al. Beyond objective performance evaluation in multimodal biometric systems. Ann. Telecommun. 62, 156–176 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03253254

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03253254

Key words

Mots clés

Search

Navigation