Paper detail

Statistical Methods for Assessing Differences in False Non-Match Rates Across Demographic Groups

Biometric recognition is used across a variety of applications from cyber security to border security. Recent research has focused on ensuring biometric performance (false negatives and false positives) is fair across demographic groups. While there has been significant progress on the development of metrics, the evaluation of the performance across groups, and the mitigation of any problems, there has been little work incorporating statistical variation. This is important because differences among groups can be found by chance when no difference is present. In statistics this is called a Type I error. Differences among groups may be due to sampling variation or they may be due to actual difference in system performance. Discriminating between these two sources of error is essential for good decision making about fairness and equity. This paper presents two novel statistical approaches for assessing fairness across demographic groups. The first methodology is a bootstrapped-based hypothesis test, while the second is simpler test methodology focused upon non-statistical audience. For the latter we present the results of a simulation study about the relationship between the margin of error and factors such as number of subjects, number of attempts, correlation between attempts, underlying false non-match rates(FNMR's), and number of groups.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.