1999
DOI: 10.1109/72.788647
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fusion of face and speech data for person identity verification

Abstract: Abstract. Multi-modal person identity authentication is gaining more and more attention in the biometrics area. Combining di erent modalities increases the performance and robustness of identity authentication systems. The authentication problem is a binary classi cation problem. The fusion of di erent modalities can be therefore performed by binary classi ers. We propose to evaluate di erent binary classi cation schemes (SVM, MLP, C4.5, Fisher's linear discriminant, Bayesian classi er) on a large database (29… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
144
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 280 publications
(151 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
2
144
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Results clearly favor the Bayesian scheme with respect to the mean scheme; however, no other comparisons are carried out with, for instance, the previous approach. Other examples of opinion fusion strategies and complex multibiometric schemes can be seen in [76,65,41,69].…”
Section: Multimodal Bissmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Results clearly favor the Bayesian scheme with respect to the mean scheme; however, no other comparisons are carried out with, for instance, the previous approach. Other examples of opinion fusion strategies and complex multibiometric schemes can be seen in [76,65,41,69].…”
Section: Multimodal Bissmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is some work on fusing different biometric modalities (e.g. face and speech [3], face and fingerprint [23]), but most studies concentrate on fusing different representations of a single underlying modality (e.g. 2D and 3D facial shape in [6]).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Examples are global-learning-global-decision (GG) (Brunelli and Falavigna, 1995;Bigun et al, 1997;Kittler et al, 1998;Hong and Jain, 1998;Ben-Yacoub et al, 1999;Chatzis et al, 1999;Verlinde et al, 2000), local-learning-globaldecision (LG) (Jain and Ross, 2002;Kumar and Zhang, 2003;Indovina et al, 2003;Fierrez-Aguilar et al, 2004;Wang et al, 2004;Toh et al, 2004;Poh and Bengio, 2005), and similarly global-learninglocal-decision (GL) (Jain and Ross, 2002;Toh et al, 2004), and local-learninglocal-decision (LL) (Toh et al, 2004). In the present work we adhere to this taxonomy and extend it by incorporating new items: adapted-learning and adapted-decisions.…”
Section: Related Work and Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A common practice in most of the reported works on multimodal biometrics is to combine the matching scores obtained from the unimodal systems by using simple rules (e.g., sum, product), statistical methods, or machine learning procedures (Brunelli and Falavigna, 1995;Bigun et al, 1997;Kittler et al, 1998;Hong and Jain, 1998;Ben-Yacoub et al, 1999;Chatzis et al, 1999;Verlinde et al, 2000). A remarkable characteristic of this approach, as compared to the feature-level combination techniques, is the possibility of designing structured multimodal systems by using existing unimodal recognition strategies (Maltoni et al, 2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%