2018 7th Brazilian Conference on Intelligent Systems (BRACIS) 2018
DOI: 10.1109/bracis.2018.00044
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Writer-Independent Approach for Offline Signature Verification using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks Features

Abstract: The use of features extracted using a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) combined with a writer-dependent (WD) SVM classifier resulted in significant improvement in performance of handwritten signature verification (HSV) when compared to the previous state-of-the-art methods. In this work it is investigated whether the use of these CNN features provide good results in a writer-independent (WI) HSV context, based on the dichotomy transformation combined with the use of an SVM writer-independent classifier.… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
(70 reference statements)
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this paper, the SVM is used as writer-independent classifier with the following settings: RBF kernel, γ = 2 −11 and C = 1.0 (C and γ were selected based on a grid search: C grid = {0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100} and γ grid = {2 −11 , 0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100}). The signed distance of the samples to the classifier's hyperplane are used as classifiers output (Hafemann et al, 2017a;Souza et al, 2018b).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…In this paper, the SVM is used as writer-independent classifier with the following settings: RBF kernel, γ = 2 −11 and C = 1.0 (C and γ were selected based on a grid search: C grid = {0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100} and γ grid = {2 −11 , 0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100}). The signed distance of the samples to the classifier's hyperplane are used as classifiers output (Hafemann et al, 2017a;Souza et al, 2018b).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have previously shown in (Souza et al, 2018b) In this section we present the results on the GPDS-300 exploitation set, comparing the results with the state-of-the-art. Table 7 contains both the comparison with the state of the art methods for the GPDS-300 dataset and also the results obtained by the WI-SVMs (with and without the CNN prototype selection).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Table IV compares our results with the state-of-the-art. We observe an improved performance compared to other WI systems, achieving 5.16% EER (global τ ) with 5 reference signatures, compared to 9.05% from [30]. Comparing to WD systems, we observed similar performance in some scenarios (5 reference signatures), and worse results otherwise.…”
Section: B Comparison With the State-of-the-artmentioning
confidence: 47%