Acceso abierto

Deep Learning Models for Biometric Recognition based on Face, Finger vein, Fingerprint, and Iris: A Survey

, ,  y   
15 jun 2024

Cite
Descargar portada

Figure 1:

Organization of the survey
Organization of the survey

Figure 2:

Biometric Traits
Biometric Traits

Figure 3:

Example of a general biometric system [8]
Example of a general biometric system [8]

IRIS- BASED DEEP LEARNING MODEL USING CASIA-IRIS-THOUSAND DATASET

Method Year Architecture Accuracy EER
Liu, N., et al. [140] 2016 DCNN - 0.15
Nguyen, K., et al. [146] 2017 DCNN 98.8% -
Alaslani, M.G. [154] 2018 Alex-Net Model + SVM 96.6% -
Lee, Y.W., et al. [159] 2019 Deep ResNet - 1.3331
Liu, Ming, et al. [162] 2019 DCNN 83.1% 0.16
Chen, Y., et al. [175] 2021 DCNN 99.14% -
Alinia Lat, Reihan, et al. [188] 2022 DCNN 99.84% 1.87

FACE- BASED DEEP LEARNING RESULTS USING LFW DATASET

Method Year Architecture Accuracy EER
Tian L. et. al [34] 2016 Multiple Scales Combined DL 93.16% -
Xiong C. et al [35] 2016 Deep Mixture Model (DMM), and Convolutional Fusion Network (CFN) 87.50 % 1.57
Al-Waisy, A. S., et al. [44] 2017 Deep Belief Network DBN 98.83% 0.012
Zhuang, Ni, et al [47] 2018 deep transfer NN 84.34% -
Santoso K, et al. [51] 2018 DL network using Triple loss 95.5 -
Li, Y., et al. [52] 2018 DCNN 97.2% -
Luo, D, et al. [54] 2018 deep cascaded detection method 99.43% 0.16
Kong, J, et al. [55] 2018 novel DLN 95.84% -
Iqbal, M, et al. [56] 2019 DCNN 99.77% -
Khan, M Z., et al. [57] 2019 DCNN 97.9% -
Elmahmudi, A., et al. [61] 2019 CNN + pre-trained VGG 99% -
Wang, P., et al. [62] 2019 deep class-skewed learning method 99.9% -
Bendjillali, R., et al. [63] 2019 DCNN 98.13% -
Goel, T., et, al. [66] 2020 Deep Convolutional-Optimized Kernel Extreme Learning Machine (DC-OKELM 99.2% 0.04
Zhang, J., et al. [86] 2022 Lightened CNN 99.9% -

PERFORMANCE RESULTS OF THE BEST FINGER VEIN-BASED DEEP LEARNING MODELS

Method Year Dataset Architecture Accuracy EER
Nguyen, Dat Tien, et al [192] 2017 - CNN + SVM - 0.00
Chen, Cheng, et al. [195] 2017 Collected DBN + CNN 99.6% -
Fang, Y. et al. [198] 2018 MMCBNU DCNN - 0.10
Wang, Jun, et al. [200] 2018 PolyU CNN + SVM - 0.068
Das, Rig, et al. [201] 2018 UTFVP CNN 98.33% -
Xie, C., et al. [203] 2019 - CNN + Supervised Discrete Hashing - 0.093
Li, J., et al [204] 2019 SDUMLA Graph Neural Network (GNN) 99.98% -
Zhang, J., et al. [205] 2019 SDUMLA Fully Convolutional GAN + CNN 99.15% 0.87
Hou, B., et al. [206] 2019 FV-USM Convolutional Auto-Encoder (CAE) + SVM 99.95 % 0.12
Kamaruddin, N.M., et al. [207] 2019 FV-USM PCANET 100% -
Yang, W., et al. [209] 2019 MMCBNU Proposed DL (multilayer extreme learning machine + binary decision diagram (BDD)) 98.70% -
Zhao, D., et al. [212] 2020 MMCBNU DCNN 99%.05 0.503
Kuzu, R.S. [214] 2020 SDUMLA DCNN + Autoencoder, 99.99% 0.009
Kuzu, R., et al. [215] 2020 Collected CNN + LSTM 99.13%. -
Boucherit, I., et al. [216] 2020 THU-FVFDT2 DCNN 99.56%. -
Zhao, Jia-Yi, et al. [217] 2020 FV-USM DCNN 98% -
Noh, K. J., et al. [219] 2020 HKPolyU DCNN - 0.05
Zeng, J., et al. [220] 2020 MMCBNU RNN + Conditional Random Field (CRF) - 0.36
Bilal, A., et al. [221] 2021 SDUMLA DCNN 99.84% -
Shen, J, et al. [222] 2021 PKU-FVD DCNN 99.6% 0.67
Wang, K., et, al. [223] 2021 FV-USM Multi-Receptive Field Bilinear CNN 100% -
Hou, B [224] 2021 FV-USM DCNN 99.79% 0.25
Huang, J., et al. [225] 2021 MMCBNU Joint Attention Finger Vein Network - 0.08
Huang, Z., et al. [230] 2021 SDUMLA DCNN 99.53% -
Shaheed, K., et al. [231] 2022 SDUMLA DCNN 99% -
Muthusamy, D. [232] 2022 SDUMLA Deep Perceptive Fuzzy NN (DPFNN) 98% -
Hou, B., et al. [235] 2022 FV-USM Triplet-Classifier GAN 99.66% 0.03

IRIS- BASED DEEP LEARNING MODEL USING IITD DATASET RESULTS

Method Year Architecture Accuracy EER
Al-Waisy, Alaa S., et al. [147] 2018 DCNN + softmax 100% -
Alaslani, M.G. [154] 2018 Alex-Net + SVM 98.3% -
Chen, Ying, et al. [155] 2019 DCNN + softmax 98.1% -
Liu, Ming, et al. [162] 2019 DCNN 86.8% -
Chen, Y., et al. [173] 2020 DCNN 99.3% 0.74
Chen, Y., et al. [175] 2021 DCNN 97.24% 0.18
Chen, Ying, et al. [181] 2021 DenseSENet 99.06% 0.945
Alinia Lat, Reihan, et al. [188] 2022 DCNN 99.99% 0.45

IRIS- BASED DEEP LEARNING MODEL USING MULTIPLE KINDS OF IRIS DATASETS

Dataset Method Architecture Accuracy EER
CASIA-V4 He, Fei, et al. [142] Gabor + DBN 99.998% -
Wang, Zi, et al. [150] Convolutional and Residual network 99.08% -
Zhang, Wei, et al. [161] Fully Dilated U-Net (FD-UNet) 97.36% -
Azam, M.S., et al. [171] DCNN + SVM 96.3% -
Chen, Y., et al. [175] DCNN 97.35% 1.05

UBIRIS Proença, H. et al. [145] DCNN 99.8% 0.019
Wang, Zi, et al. [150] Convolutional and Residual network 96.12% -
Zhang, Wei, et al. [161] Fully Dilated U-Net (FD-UNet) 94.81% -
Shirke, S.D., et al. [178] DBN 97.9% -

ND Nguyen, Kien, et, al. [146] Pre-trained CNNs 98.7% -
Zhang, Wei, et al [161] Fully Dilated U-Net (FD-UNet) 96.74% -

BIOMETRIC-BASED SYSTEMS REQUIREMENTS

Universality All authorized individuals must have the utilized biometric trait
Distinctiveness No two authorized individuals have similar characteristics of the trait
Permanence The obtained trait doesn't change for a specific duration of time
Performance Identified in the achieved Security, speed, accuracy, and robustness
Acceptability Agreed by the individual's population without an interception
Circumvention The degree ability of to use a fake biometric
Collectability The simplicity of gathering traits samples in a comfortable manner for the individual

BIOMETRICS FEATURES AND APPLICATIONS

Biometric trait Significant Features Applications
Face

No need for physical friction

Easy in keeping templet.

Comfortable, statistics less complicated

Rapid identification procedure

Changes depending on time, age, incidental events,

Differences between twins are difficult.

Affected by lighting in the surrounding environment.

May be partially occluded by other objects

Access control

Face ID

Interaction within computer

Criminal determination

Monitoring

Smart cards

Fingerprint

Modern, reliable, safe, highly accurate and less cost

Rapid matching

Need small memory space.

Affected by wound, dust, twists.

Need a physical communication

Authentication of the driver

Criminals' determination and forensics

Authentication in both license and visa cards

Access control

Iris

Scalable, accurate and highly covered

Samples of small size

Rapid processing and maximum cost

Have unparalleled structure.

Remains stable throughout the life

Difficult to adjust.

High randomness

No physical contact is needed and just user collaboration.

Hidden by some eye parts such as lashes.

Affected by some illness conditions

Criminals' determination, and forensics

Identification

Access control

National security determining in all of seaports, land, and airports

Finger vein

Sanitary without any touch

Highly accurate and hard to spoof.

Unique

Affected by body temperature.

Affected by some diseases.

Tiny size of template

Minimum processing

Driver identification

Door's security login

Bank services

Physical access monitoring and attendance time

Airports, hospitals, schools

FACE- BASED DEEP LEARNING RESULTS USING Yale and Yale FACE B DATASET

Method Year Architecture Accuracy EER
Tripathi, B. K. [46] 2017 One-Class-in-One-Neuron (OCON) DL 97.4 % -
Kong, J, et, al. [55] 2018 Novel DLN 100% -
Görgel, P., et al. [58] 2019 Deep Stacked De-Noising Sparse Auto encoders (DS-DSA) 98.16% -
Li, Y. K., et al. [60] 2019 DL network L1-2D2PCANet 96.86% 0.77
Goel, T., et, al. [66] 2020 Deep Convolutional-Optimized Kernel Extreme Learning Machine (DC-OKELM) - 6.67

PERFORMANCE RESULTS OF THE BEST FINGERPRINT- BASED DEEP LEARNING MODELS

Method Year Dataset Architecture Accuracy EER
Kim, S., et al. [91] 2016 Collected DBN 99.4% -
Jeon, W. S. et al. [95] 2017 FVC DCNN 97.2% -
Wang, Z., et al. [96] 2017 NIST Novel approach (D-LVQ) 99.075% -
Peralta, D., et al. [100] 2018 Collected DCNN 99.6% -
Yu, Y., et al. [101] 2018 Collected DCNN 96.46% -
Lin, C., et al. [102] 2018 - DCNN 99.89% 0.64
Jung, H. Y., et al [103] 2018 - DCNN 98.6% -
Yuan, C, et al [111] 2019 LivDet 2013 Deep Residual Network (DRN) 97.04% -
Haider, Amir, et al. [115] 2019 Collected DCNN 95.94% -
Song, D., et al. [116] 2019 Collected 1-D CNN - 0.06
Uliyan, D.M., et al. [118] 2020 LivDet 2013 Deep Boltzmann Machines along with KNN 96% -
Liu, Feng, et al. [119] 2020 - DeepPoreID - 0.16
Yang, X., et al. [120] 2020 Collected DCNN 97.1% -
Arora, S., et al. [122] 2020 DigitalPersona 2015 DCNN 99.80% -
Zhang, Z., et al. [124] 2021 - DCNN 98.24% -
Ahsan, M., et al. [125] 2021 Collected Gabor filtering and DCNN+ PCA 99.87% 4.28
Leghari, M., et, al. [126] 2021 Collected DCNN 99.87% -
Li, H. [127] 2021 NIST DCNN 98.65% -
Lee, Samuel, et al [129] 2021 NIST Proposed Pix2Pix DL model 100% -
Nahar, P., et al. [131] 2021 - DCNN 99.1% -
Ibrahim, A.M., et al. [132] 2021 - DCNN 99.22% -
Gustisyaf, A.I., et al. [133] 2021 Collected DCNN 99.9667% -
Yuan, C., Yu, et al. [135] 2022 - DCNN - 0.3
Saeed, F., et, al [137] 0 FVC DCNN 98. -
2 89%
2

The ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTGES OF THE MOST WIDLY USEED DEP LEARNING ARCHITECTURES

Architecture Advantages Disadvantages
CNN

Unsupervised feature learning

Low complexity due to count of parameters and sharing of weights.

High performance in recognition and classification of images

Large dataset required.

Long training time

Unable to deal with input variations (i.e., orientation, position, environment)

RNN

Can remember and learn from past data, to give better prediction.

The ability to capture long sequences patterns in the data of large size.

Often utilized for natural language processing tasks

computationally expensive

more porn to overfitting and vanishing gradient problems.

hard to optimize due to the large count of layers and parameters.

LSTM

Better attitude in dealing with long-term dependencies.

Utilized LSTM cell as activation function so it's less susceptible to the vanishing gradient problem.

Very effective at modeling complex sequential data.

More complicated than RNNs

require more training data in order to learn effectively.

Not suited for prediction or classification tasks.

Slow on large datasets training.

Not work effectively for all kinds of data such as nonlinear or noisy ones.

GRU

Uses less memory and is faster than LSTM.

Has fewer parameters than LSTM

low learning efficiency, due to the slow convergence rate

too long training time

may suffer from under-fitting problem

AE

Unsupervised and doesn't need labeled data for training.

Convert the high dimension data into low dimension features.

High scalability with the increase of data.

minimize the noise of entered data

high complexity

computationally expensive,

need large training dataset.

causes losses in interpretability, when representing features in a latent space

DBN

Unsupervised feature learning

robust in classification (size, position, color, view angle – rotation).

implemented in many kinds of dataset.

resistant to overfitting due to the RBMs' contribution to model regularization.

Can manage missing data

high complexity

computationally expensive

need large training dataset.

GAN

Can deal with partially labelled data.

Efficient generation of samples which looks like the original one.

used in generating images and videos.

Hard to be trained due to the need for different data types in a continuous manner.

training cannot be completed when having missing pattern.

have difficulties in dealing with discrete data (e.g., text)