RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION DESIGN 2012

www.PosterPresentati ons.com
Handwritten signatures are one of the most widely used biometrics, particularly in
financial and legal transactions. Offline Signature verification is still one of the most
challenging problems in biometrics. In this study, we have evaluated the performance
of different classifiers for offline signature verification based upon local binary
patterns feature set. The feature vector is formed by dividing the signature images
into twelve local regions and forming a code matrix by their LBPs. The histogram of
each code matrix is formulated and concatenated. The dimensionality of feature
vector is subsequently reduced by keeping the 256 DCT coefficients of the
concatenated vector. We have investigated the performance of seven classifiers on
FUM-PHSDB dataset comprising 20 classes of genuine and forged signatures of depth
20 and 10 respectively. Experimental findings depict that LS-SVM performs the best
among the seven classifiers, achieving the Equal Error Rate (EER) of 13%.
Index Terms Offline signature verification, local binary patterns, classification, LS-SVM.
ABSTRACT
EXPERIMENTATION
RESULTS
The paper presents a comparative analysis of seven classifiers for offline signature
verification using gray level features based upon local binary patterns. SVM based
classifiers outperform the others, whereby LS-SVM demonstrated the best
classification accuracy with EER of 13%. The results were also compared with
different published approaches, depicting promising result of the proposed approach.
In future, we intend to extend the approach to multi-modal offline signature
verification.
CONTACT
rameezw@gmail.com, 120808@student.au.edu.pk
atif.mansoor@mail.au.edu.pk
The database
The FUM-Persian Handwritten Signature Database (FUM-PHSDB 2006) is used in
experiments. The database contains 20 signature classes, consisting of 20 genuine
signatures and 10 expert forgery signatures for each individual. The signatures were
obtained by signing on a 1010 cm white paper using a black pen and later scanned at
a resolution of 300 DPI (dot per inch). Fig. 1 shows genuine and forged signature
samples from a class of the database.
Fig.1 Genuine (left) and forged (right) signature sample from FUM-PHSDB
We divided the database in two equal sets. The training and validation set contains 10
original signatures and 5 skilled forgeries for each class. Thus, a total of 300 samples
are used for training the classifier and a further 300 for verification.
Gray Level Feature Extraction
Local binary pattern (LBP) is an efficient gray-level feature commonly used in texture
classification. The popularity of the LBP operator, especially in real-time applications,
is mainly due to its simple computation and its robustness to illumination variations
and other monotonic gray-scale changes.
IBP
P,R
(v) = s v
p
v
c
2
p
P1
p=0
where, v
c
is the value of original pixel, v
p
the value of neighbor, P is the number of
neighbors and R is radius over which LBP is applied, and s is a step function. The gray-
level image from a signature class was divided into 12 equal blocks for feature
extraction. The selected blocks were four in vertical and three in horizontal direction,
with a 60% overlap. We have applied the rotation invariant LBP to these blocks
forming a code matrix. The histogram of each code matrix is further formulated,
having a dimension of 255. Fig. 2 shows the histograms of code matrices of two
blocks, clearly demonstrating their variations.
Subsequently, the 12 histograms were concatenated to form the feature vector of
3060 dimension. The dimensionality of feature vector was reduced by the Discrete
Cosine Transform (DCT). The DCT was calculated as follows:
J k =w(k) x(n)cos
n(2n1)(k1)
2N
N
n=1
k = 1,2,N
Where, x(n) is the nth value of LBP histogram, N is the dimension of input vector
(3060 in this case). The first 256 coefficients of the DCT form the final feature vector
for classification. The histogram of a reduced feature vector is shown in Fig.2.
Fig.2 Histograms of a code matrix of individual blocks to form the reduced feature vector
Rank
Classifier Performance Evaluation
Classifier EER
1 LS-SVM 13 %
2 SVM 22 %
3 DLRT 24 %
4 ANN 32 %
5 FLD 36 %
6 LogDiscriminant 36 %
7 Naive Bayes 47 %
S
No
Performance Comparison
Technique / Feature Classifier Performance
1 Stroke distributions SVM EER=13.12%
2
Graylevel features
with Discrete Cosine
Transform
LS-SVM EER=11.05 %
3
Pixel distributions
usingChebyshev
distances.
Combination
of similarity
based
classifier and
SVM
EER=7%
4
Discrete Wavelet
Transformand
Image Fusion
Difference
based
Classifier
FRR=8.9%
FAR=10%
5
Gray-Level Stoke
Variations
SVM EER=14.32%
6
Contourlet
Transform
Difference
based
Classifier
EER=14.00%
7 PROPOSEDLBP LS-SVM EER=13%
Institute of Avionics & Aeronautics, Air University, Islamabad, Pakistan
Rameez Wajid, Atif Bin Mansoor
CLASSIFIER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FOR OFFLINE
SIGNATURE VERIFICATION USING LOCAL BINARY
PATTERNS
The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves obtained from the classifications
are displayed in Fig 3. The classifier performance is evaluated in Table I, using Equal
Error Rate (EER) as the performance parameter for each classifier.
Fig.3 Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curves for different classifiers
CONCLUSIONS
Table I clearly display the suitability of SVM based classification methods over others
for offline signature verification. The best results are obtained using the LS-SVM
classifier, achieving an EER of 13%.
The EER of LS-SVM classifier is compared with different approaches reported in
literature in Table II. The comparative analysis shows promising results by employing
LS-SVM based classification using LBP features.
TABLE I CLASSIFIER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION TABLE II PERFORMANCE COMPARISON