Print 15 comment(s) - last by eldakka.. on Jul 18 at 10:26 PM

Studies find iris changes with age

There are numerous different security technologies on the market today to limit access to digital information and for physical security on doors or gates. One common method of limiting access to specific areas in a building includes iris recognition systems. These are the systems that scan a person's eyes to determine their identity and allow them access to restricted areas.
Since the early days of iris recognition technology, users and developers have assumed that the iris doesn't change over time. If the iris doesn't change over time that means a person can be enrolled once and the system should recognize them indefinitely. However, recent studies have shown that the iris of a person's eye can in fact change over time leading to the possibility of false negatives and false positives.
"The biometric community has long accepted that there is no 'template aging effect' for iris recognition, meaning that once you are enrolled in an iris recognition system, your chances of experiencing a false non-match error remain constant over time," stated Kevin Bowyer, Notre Dame's Schubmel-Prein Family Chair in Computer Science and Engineering.
"This was sometimes expressed as 'a single enrollment for life.' Our experimental results show that, in fact, the false non-match rate increases over time, which means that the single enrollment for life idea is wrong."
Bowyer worked with Sam Fenker, an undergraduate from Notre Dame, to analyze a very large data set containing iris images acquired over a longer period of time. The researchers were able to analyze iris images year to year for three successive years to determine if changes occurred. The research found that the iris could in fact change over time requiring reenrollment.
Bowyer added, "I do not see this as a major problem for security systems going forward… In the long run, researchers may develop new approaches that are 'aging-resistant.' The iris template aging effect will only be a problem for those who for some reason refuse to believe that it exists."

Source: Eurek Alert

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Simple solution
By bupkus on 7/13/2012 8:18:47 PM , Rating: 2
or termination having detected a progressive disease that the HMO would flag as a high risk factor. Yes, abuses are a very possible result.
This is the part of the sentence that you seemed to have ignored. Detecting drug use through covert means is another issue I had not intended to address but as long as you've raised that point I am willing to combine both as abuse of power.

RE: Simple solution
By bupkus on 7/13/2012 8:21:44 PM , Rating: 2
I am willing to combine both as abuse of privacy.

RE: Simple solution
By Bad-Karma on 7/14/2012 2:25:27 AM , Rating: 3
Termination for a a genetic defect or disease has already been ruled against by the U.S courts as long as it does not affect your ability to perform the job.

How it is an abuse of privacy if you understood and signed the terms of employment?

And again, it doesn't matter if it is a covert sampling. If you willingly violate the terms of your employment then the onus is on you and you should be removed.

You want to keep your job,then simply follow the agreed to rules.

RE: Simple solution
By 91TTZ on 7/16/2012 2:28:48 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it does matter if it was a covert sampling. How information is obtained matters greatly when it comes to law. Usually a person needs to consent to a drug test.

"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs
Latest Headlines

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki