National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$41.50
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Biometric Recognition: Challenges and Opportunities (2010)
Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB)

Citation Manager

. "Appendix D: Testing and Evaluation Examples." Biometric Recognition: Challenges and Opportunities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2010.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
156
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Biometric Recognition: Challenges and Opportunities

that all candidates for whom the 10-fingerprint to 10-fingerprint search score was above a certain level were always declared as matches (or hits) by the examiners. As a result of this analysis the FBI was able to let the IAFIS system automatically declare as matches about 25 percent of the hits that previously required human intervention. This test used routine operational data in an operational environment and was not orchestrated to include any controls or prescreening on the input data. The transactions were run through the system normally, and match decisions were made by human examiners working with candidates presented by the IAFIS automated matchers.

DISNEY’S ENTRANCE CONTROL SYSTEM

Walt Disney World (WDW) has publicly reported1 on internal testing using several different biometric technologies over the years. (See Box 5.1 for more on Disney’s use of biometrics.) WDW tested various hand geometry and finger scanning technologies at several theme park locations to evaluate alternative technologies to the then-existing finger geometry used in its turnstile application. WDW also tested technologies for other applications to increase guest service and improve operating efficiency. Testing there is done in four stages: laboratory testing, technology testing, scenario testing, and operational evaluation. Since WDW has had existing biometric technology in place since 1996 and a substantial amount of experience with the biometric industry, its mind-set is that a threshold has been set for performance in both error rates and throughput and prospective vendors must exceed this level of performance to be considered for future enhancement projects.

In WDW lab testing, prospective biometric devices or technologies are examined for the underlying strengths of their technology/modality, usability, and accuracy. This testing is performed under optimal, controlled conditions for all of the relevant parameters that can affect performance. Parameters like technology construction and architecture, component mean time between failures, and theoretical throughput are extrapolated based on the results of laboratory tests. The goal of laboratory testing is to quickly determine whether a device or technology is worth investigating further. If a technology does not meet a performance level above the existing technology under optimal conditions, there is no point in investigating further.

If a prospective biometric device or technology is determined to be promising in the WDW lab environment, then the next stage of testing,

Page
156