Researcher profile

Larry R. Price

Larry R. Price contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 11 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
1works
0followers
1topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Why Temporal Persistence of Biometric Features is so Valuable for Classification Performance

It is generally accepted that relatively more permanent (i.e., more temporally persistent) traits are more valuable for biometric performance than less permanent traits. Although this finding is intuitive, there is no current work identifying exactly where in the biometric analysis temporal persistence makes a difference. In this paper, we answer this question. In a recent report, we introduced the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) as an index of temporal persistence for such features. In that report, we also showed that choosing only the most temporally persistent features yielded superior performance in 12 of 14 datasets. Motivated by those empirical results, we present a novel approach using synthetic features to study which aspects of a biometric identification study are influenced by the temporal persistence of features. What we show is that using more temporally persistent features produces effects on the similarity score distributions that explain why this quality is so key to biometric performance. The results identified with the synthetic data are largely reinforced by an analysis of two datasets, one based on eye-movements and one based on gait. There was one difference between the synthetic and real data: In real data, features are intercorrelated, with the level of intercorrelation increasing with increasing ICC. This increasedhttps://www.overleaf.com/project/5e2b14694c5dc600017292e6 intercorrelation in real data was associated with an increase in the spread of the impostor similarity score distributions. Removing these intercorrelations for real datasets with a decorrelation step produced results which were very similar to that obtained with synthetic features.