3.8 Proceedings Paper

Level Three Synthetic Fingerprint Generation

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/ICPR48806.2021.9412304

关键词

-

资金

  1. CNPq

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study introduces a novel hybrid approach to create realistic, high-resolution fingerprints in response to legal restrictions on protecting biometric data privacy. The researchers managed to generate a synthetic database and included sweat pore annotations to encourage further research. The performance of real and synthetic databases was found to be similar, with human perception unable to differentiate between the two. The study suggests that the proposed approach is state-of-the-art in the field.
Today's legal restrictions that protect the privacy of biometric data are hampering fingerprint recognition researches. For instance, all high-resolution fingerprint databases ceased to be publicly available. To address this problem, we present a novel hybrid approach to synthesize realistic, high-resolution fingerprints. First, we improved Anguli, a handcrafted fingerprint generator, to obtain dynamic ridge maps with sweat pores and scratches. Then, we trained a CycleGAN to transform these maps into realistic fingerprints. Unlike other CNN-based works, we can generate several images for the same identity. We used our approach to create a synthetic database with 7400 images in an attempt to propel further studies in this field without raising legal issues. We included sweat pore annotations in 740 images to encourage research developments in pore detection. In our experiments, we employed two fingerprint matching approaches to confirm that real and synthetic databases have similar performance. We conducted a human perception analysis where sixty volunteers could hardly differ between real and synthesized fingerprints. Given that we also favorably compare our results with the most advanced works in the literature, our experimentation suggests that our approach is the new state-of-the-art.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据