As more types of transactions move online, there is an increasing need to verify someone’s identity remotely. Remote identity verification (RIdV) technologies have emerged to fill this need. RIdV solutions typically use a smart device to validate an identity document like a driver’s license by comparing a face selfie to the face photo on the document. Recent research has been focused on ensuring that biometric systems work fairly across demographic groups. This study assesses five commercial RIdV solutions for equity across age, gender, race/ethnicity, and skin tone across 3,991 test subjects. This paper employs statistical methods to discern whether the RIdV result across demographic groups is statistically distinguishable. Two of the RIdV solutions were equitable across all demographics, while two RIdV solutions had at least one demographic that was in-equitable. For example, the results for one technology had a false negative rate of 10.5% +/- 4.5% and its performance for each demographic category was within the error bounds, and, hence, were equitable. The other technologies saw either poor overall performance or inequitable performance. For one of these, participants of the race Black/African American (B/AA) as well as those with darker skin tones (Monk scale 7/8/9/10) experienced higher false rejections. Finally, one technology demonstrated more favorable but inequitable performance for the Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) demographic. This study confirms that it is necessary to evaluate products across demographic groups to fully understand the performance of remote identity verification technologies.

The dilation of the pupil and it's variation between a mated pair of irides has been found to be an important factor in the performance of iris recognition systems. Studies on adult irides indicated significant impact of dilation on iris recognition performance at different ages. However, the results of adults may not necessarily translate to children. This study analyzes dilation as a factor of age and over time in children, from data collected from same 209 subjects in the age group of four to 11 years at enrollment, longitudinally over three years spaced by six months. The performance of iris recognition is also analyzed in presence of dilation variation.

In this paper, we propose parametric correlation models for the assessment of biometric classification error rates. Correctly specified correlations are integral to variance estimation and the corresponding inferential quantities which depend upon these estimates. We present methodology here for false match and false nonmatch error rates for a single environment. This paper generalizes other work that has previously appeared in the bioauthentication literature. Since symmetric- and asymmetric-matching algorithms are used in practice, we present a general correlation structure for both types of algorithms. Along with the correlation structure, we describe estimators for the parameters in these models. The correlation structure described here for binary decision data is then used to derive explicit confidence intervals and sample-size calculations for the estimation of false match and false nonmatch error rates. We then apply the correlation structure described herein to two match scores databases to illustrate our approach. A discussion of the utility and consequences of this correlation structure are also provided.

Measurement and evaluation of biometric device performance is critical to end users and consumers of these devices. In this paper we present explicit theoretical correlation models when the biometric matching process is stationary that can be used to derive variance estimates of biometric performance metrics. We focus in this paper on the failure to enroll, the failure to acquire, the false match rate and the false non-match rate. We further present unified notation that makes our correlation frameworks possible.

Face recognition technologies have seen dramatic improvements in performance over the past decade, and such systems are now widely used for security and commercial applications. Since recognizing faces is a task that humans are understood to be very good at, it is common to want to compare automatic face recognition (AFR) and human face recognition (HFR) in terms of biometric performance. This paper addresses this question by: 1) conducting verification tests on volunteers (HFR) and commercial AFR systems and 2) developing statistical methods to support comparison of the performance of different biometric systems. HFR was tested by presenting face-image pairs and asking subjects to classify them on a scale of "Same," "Probably Same," "Not sure," "Probably Different," and "Different"; the same image pairs were presented to AFR systems, and the biometric match score was measured. To evaluate these results, two new statistical evaluation techniques are developed. The first is a new way to normalize match-score distributions, where a normalized match score t is calculated as a function of the angle from a representation of [false match rate, false nonmatch rate] values in polar coordinates from some center. Using this normalization, we develop a second methodology to calculate an average detection error tradeoff (DET) curve and show that this method is equivalent to direct averaging of DET data along each angle from the center. This procedure is then applied to compare the performance of the best AFR algorithms available to us in the years 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2006, in comparison to human scores. Results show that algorithms have dramatically improved in performance over that time. In comparison to the performance of the best AFR system of 2006, 29.2% of human subjects performed better, while 37.5% performed worse.