BioSecure signature evaluation campaign (BSEC2009): Evaluating online signature algorithms depending on the quality of signatures

N. Houmani; A. Mayoue; S. Garcia-Salicetti; B. Dorizzi; M. I. Khalil; M. N. Moustafa; H. Abbas; D. Muramatsu; B. Yanikoglu; A. Kholmatov; M. Martinez-Diaz; J. Fierrez; J. Ortega-Garcia; J. Roure Alcobé; J. Fabregas; M. Faundez-Zanuy; J. M. Pascual-Gaspar; V. Cardeñoso-Payo; C. Vivaracho-Pascual

doi:10.1016/j.patcog.2011.08.008

BioSecure signature evaluation campaign (BSEC2009): Evaluating online signature algorithms depending on the quality of signatures

N. Houmani
, A. Mayoue
, S. Garcia-Salicetti
, B. Dorizzi
, M. I. Khalil
, M. N. Moustafa
, H. Abbas
, D. Muramatsu
, B. Yanikoglu
, A. Kholmatov
, M. Martinez-Diaz
, J. Fierrez
, J. Ortega-Garcia
, J. Roure Alcobé
, J. Fabregas
, M. Faundez-Zanuy
, J. M. Pascual-Gaspar
, V. Cardeñoso-Payo
, C. Vivaracho-Pascual

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

In this paper, we present the main results of the BioSecure Signature Evaluation Campaign (BSEC2009). The objective of BSEC2009 was to evaluate different online signature algorithms on two tasks: the first one aims at studying the influence of acquisition conditions (digitizing tablet or PDA) on systems performance; the second one aims at studying the impact of information content in signatures on systems performance. In BSEC2009, the two BioSecure Data Sets DS2 and DS3 are used for tests, both containing data of the same 382 people, acquired respectively on a digitizing tablet and on a PDA. The results of the 12 systems involved in this evaluation campaign are reported and analyzed in detail in this paper. Experimental results reveal a 2.2% EER for skilled forgeries and a 0.51% EER for random forgeries on DS2; and a 4.97% EER for skilled forgeries and a 0.55% EER for random forgeries on DS3.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	993-1003
Number of pages	11
Journal	Pattern Recognition
Volume	45
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2011.08.008
Publication status	Published - 1 Mar 2012
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Entropy
Evaluations
On-line signature verification
Quality
Signature Categorization

Access to Document

10.1016/j.patcog.2011.08.008

Cite this

Houmani, N., Mayoue, A., Garcia-Salicetti, S., Dorizzi, B., Khalil, M. I., Moustafa, M. N., Abbas, H., Muramatsu, D., Yanikoglu, B., Kholmatov, A., Martinez-Diaz, M., Fierrez, J., Ortega-Garcia, J., Roure Alcobé, J., Fabregas, J., Faundez-Zanuy, M., Pascual-Gaspar, J. M., Cardeñoso-Payo, V., & Vivaracho-Pascual, C. (2012). BioSecure signature evaluation campaign (BSEC2009): Evaluating online signature algorithms depending on the quality of signatures. Pattern Recognition, 45(3), 993-1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2011.08.008

@article{5e2488c4b3194c0db4a9f118045a139f,

title = "BioSecure signature evaluation campaign (BSEC2009): Evaluating online signature algorithms depending on the quality of signatures",

abstract = "In this paper, we present the main results of the BioSecure Signature Evaluation Campaign (BSEC2009). The objective of BSEC2009 was to evaluate different online signature algorithms on two tasks: the first one aims at studying the influence of acquisition conditions (digitizing tablet or PDA) on systems performance; the second one aims at studying the impact of information content in signatures on systems performance. In BSEC2009, the two BioSecure Data Sets DS2 and DS3 are used for tests, both containing data of the same 382 people, acquired respectively on a digitizing tablet and on a PDA. The results of the 12 systems involved in this evaluation campaign are reported and analyzed in detail in this paper. Experimental results reveal a 2.2\% EER for skilled forgeries and a 0.51\% EER for random forgeries on DS2; and a 4.97\% EER for skilled forgeries and a 0.55\% EER for random forgeries on DS3.",

keywords = "Entropy, Evaluations, On-line signature verification, Quality, Signature Categorization",

author = "N. Houmani and A. Mayoue and S. Garcia-Salicetti and B. Dorizzi and Khalil, \{M. I.\} and Moustafa, \{M. N.\} and H. Abbas and D. Muramatsu and B. Yanikoglu and A. Kholmatov and M. Martinez-Diaz and J. Fierrez and J. Ortega-Garcia and \{Roure Alcob{\'e}\}, J. and J. Fabregas and M. Faundez-Zanuy and Pascual-Gaspar, \{J. M.\} and V. Carde{\~n}oso-Payo and C. Vivaracho-Pascual",

year = "2012",

month = mar,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.patcog.2011.08.008",

language = "English",

volume = "45",

pages = "993--1003",

journal = "Pattern Recognition",

issn = "0031-3203",

number = "3",

}

Houmani, N, Mayoue, A, Garcia-Salicetti, S, Dorizzi, B, Khalil, MI, Moustafa, MN, Abbas, H, Muramatsu, D, Yanikoglu, B, Kholmatov, A, Martinez-Diaz, M, Fierrez, J, Ortega-Garcia, J, Roure Alcobé, J, Fabregas, J, Faundez-Zanuy, M, Pascual-Gaspar, JM, Cardeñoso-Payo, V & Vivaracho-Pascual, C 2012, 'BioSecure signature evaluation campaign (BSEC2009): Evaluating online signature algorithms depending on the quality of signatures', Pattern Recognition, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 993-1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2011.08.008

TY - JOUR

T1 - BioSecure signature evaluation campaign (BSEC2009)

T2 - Evaluating online signature algorithms depending on the quality of signatures

AU - Houmani, N.

AU - Mayoue, A.

AU - Garcia-Salicetti, S.

AU - Dorizzi, B.

AU - Khalil, M. I.

AU - Moustafa, M. N.

AU - Abbas, H.

AU - Muramatsu, D.

AU - Yanikoglu, B.

AU - Kholmatov, A.

AU - Martinez-Diaz, M.

AU - Fierrez, J.

AU - Ortega-Garcia, J.

AU - Roure Alcobé, J.

AU - Fabregas, J.

AU - Faundez-Zanuy, M.

AU - Pascual-Gaspar, J. M.

AU - Cardeñoso-Payo, V.

AU - Vivaracho-Pascual, C.

PY - 2012/3/1

Y1 - 2012/3/1

N2 - In this paper, we present the main results of the BioSecure Signature Evaluation Campaign (BSEC2009). The objective of BSEC2009 was to evaluate different online signature algorithms on two tasks: the first one aims at studying the influence of acquisition conditions (digitizing tablet or PDA) on systems performance; the second one aims at studying the impact of information content in signatures on systems performance. In BSEC2009, the two BioSecure Data Sets DS2 and DS3 are used for tests, both containing data of the same 382 people, acquired respectively on a digitizing tablet and on a PDA. The results of the 12 systems involved in this evaluation campaign are reported and analyzed in detail in this paper. Experimental results reveal a 2.2% EER for skilled forgeries and a 0.51% EER for random forgeries on DS2; and a 4.97% EER for skilled forgeries and a 0.55% EER for random forgeries on DS3.

AB - In this paper, we present the main results of the BioSecure Signature Evaluation Campaign (BSEC2009). The objective of BSEC2009 was to evaluate different online signature algorithms on two tasks: the first one aims at studying the influence of acquisition conditions (digitizing tablet or PDA) on systems performance; the second one aims at studying the impact of information content in signatures on systems performance. In BSEC2009, the two BioSecure Data Sets DS2 and DS3 are used for tests, both containing data of the same 382 people, acquired respectively on a digitizing tablet and on a PDA. The results of the 12 systems involved in this evaluation campaign are reported and analyzed in detail in this paper. Experimental results reveal a 2.2% EER for skilled forgeries and a 0.51% EER for random forgeries on DS2; and a 4.97% EER for skilled forgeries and a 0.55% EER for random forgeries on DS3.

KW - Entropy

KW - Evaluations

KW - On-line signature verification

KW - Quality

KW - Signature Categorization

U2 - 10.1016/j.patcog.2011.08.008

DO - 10.1016/j.patcog.2011.08.008

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:80054965705

SN - 0031-3203

VL - 45

SP - 993

EP - 1003

JO - Pattern Recognition

JF - Pattern Recognition

IS - 3

ER -

BioSecure signature evaluation campaign (BSEC2009): Evaluating online signature algorithms depending on the quality of signatures

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this