This paper advances the state of the art in human examination of iris images by (1) assessing the impact of different iris conditions in identity verification, and (2) introducing an annotation step that improves the accuracy of people's decisions. In a first experimental session, 114 subjects were asked to decide if pairs of iris images depict the same eye (genuine pairs) or two distinct eyes (impostor pairs). The image pairs sampled six conditions: (1) easy for algorithms to classify, (2) difficult for algorithms to classify, (3) large difference in pupil dilation, (4) disease-affected eyes, (5) identical twins, and (6) post-mortem samples. In a second session, 85 of the 114 subjects were asked to annotate matching and non-matching regions that supported their decisions. Subjects were allowed to change their initial classification as a result of the annotation process. Results suggest that: (a) people improve their identity verification accuracy when asked to annotate matching and non-matching regions between the pair of images, (b) images depicting the same eye with large difference in pupil dilation were the most challenging to subjects, but benefited well from the annotation-driven classification, (c) humans performed better than iris recognition algorithms when verifying genuine pairs of post-mortem and disease-affected eyes (i.e., samples showing deformations that go beyond the distortions of a healthy iris due to pupil dilation), and (d) annotation does not improve accuracy of analyzing images from identical twins, which remain confusing for people.
Guest al @cite_27 , in turn, investigated the performance of humans in deciding if two distinct infrared whole-eye images depict the same eye or not. In the experiments, subjects presented an overall decision accuracy of 83.2
@cite_27
2010903821 2941240724 2133946027 2103393227
We are not aware of any previous systematic investigation of how well human examiners perform at identity verification using the same type of images as acquired for automated iris recognition. This paper presents results of an experiment in which examiners consider a pair of iris images to decide if they are either (a) two images of the same eye of the same person, or (b) images of two different eyes, with the two different individuals having the same gender, ethnicity and approximate age. Results suggest that novice examiners can readily achieve accuracy exceeding 90 and can exceed 96 when they judge their decision as “certain”. Results also suggest that examiners may be able to improve their accuracy with experience. Quality, diversity, and size of training data are critical factors for learning-based gaze estimators. We create two datasets satisfying these criteria for near-eye gaze estimation under infrared illumination: a synthetic dataset using anatomically-informed eye and face models with variations in face shape, gaze direction, pupil and iris, skin tone, and external conditions (2M images at 1280x960), and a real-world dataset collected with 35 subjects (2.5M images at 640x480). Using these datasets we train neural networks performing with sub-millisecond latency. Our gaze estimation network achieves 2.06(±0.44)° of accuracy across a wide 30°×40° field of view on real subjects excluded from training and 0.5° best-case accuracy (across the same FOV) when explicitly trained for one real subject. We also train a pupil localization network which achieves higher robustness than previous methods. Since the human visual system (HVS) is the ultimate assessor of image quality, current research on the design of objective image quality metrics tends to include an important feature of the HVS, namely, visual attention. Different metrics for image quality prediction have been extended with a computational model of visual attention, but the resulting gain in reliability of the metrics so far was variable. To better understand the basic added value of including visual attention in the design of objective metrics, we used measured data of visual attention. To this end, we performed two eye-tracking experiments: one with a free-looking task and one with a quality assessment task. In the first experiment, 20 observers looked freely to 29 unimpaired original images, yielding us so-called natural scene saliency (NSS). In the second experiment, 20 different observers assessed the quality of distorted versions of the original images. The resulting saliency maps showed some differences with the NSS, and therefore, we applied both types of saliency to four different objective metrics predicting the quality of JPEG compressed images. For both types of saliency the performance gain of the metrics improved, but to a larger extent when adding the NSS. As a consequence, we further integrated NSS in several state-of-the-art quality metrics, including three full-reference metrics and two no-reference metrics, and evaluated their prediction performance for a larger set of distortions. By doing so, we evaluated whether and to what extent the addition of NSS is beneficial to objective quality prediction in general terms. In addition, we address some practical issues in the design of an attention-based metric. The eye-tracking data are made available to the research community . The iris codes for the left and right iris of a person have previously been reported to be uncorrelated. We replicate this result using images from 327 persons from the iris image dataset used in the Iris Challenge Evaluations. The same images are then used in an experiment in which subjects view a left and a right iris image, and judge whether they are correctly paired by similarity of iris texture. Subjects are able to distinguish between iris images belonging to the same person versus belonging to different persons with over 86 accuracy overall, and over 93 accuracy when they judge their decision as confident. Thus, there clearly is a similarity in the texture pattern of the left and right iris of the same person that can reliably be detected by novice observers with a brief viewing time. This is the first research that we are aware of that investigates the abilities of human observers in judging similarity or dissimilarity of iris texture.