| Literature DB >> 31366988 |
Ishan Nigam1, Rohit Keshari2, Mayank Vatsa3, Richa Singh2, Kevin Bowyer4.
Abstract
Cataract is a common ophthalmic disorder and the leading cause of blindness worldwide. While cataract is cured via surgical procedures, its impact on iris based biometric recognition has not been effectively studied. The key objective of this research is to assess the effect of cataract surgery on the iris texture pattern as a means of personal authentication. We prepare and release the IIITD Cataract Surgery Database (CaSD) captured from 132 cataract patients using three commercial iris sensors. A non-comparative non-randomized cohort study is performed on the iris texture patterns in CaSD and authentication performance is studied using three biometric recognition systems. Performance is lower when matching pre-operative images to post-operative images (74.69 ± 9.77%) as compared to matching pre-operative images to pre-operative images (93.42 ± 1.76%). 100% recognition performance is observed on a control-group of healthy irises from 68 subjects. Authentication performance improves if cataract affected subjects are re-enrolled in the system, though re-enrollment does not ensure performance at par with pre-operative scenarios (86.67 ± 5.64%). The results indicate that cataract surgery affects the discriminative nature of the iris texture pattern. This finding raises concerns about the reliability of iris-based biometric recognition systems in the context of subjects undergoing cataract surgery.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31366988 PMCID: PMC6668423 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-47222-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Illustrating healthy iris images and cataract affected iris images from two different sensors. The images of eyes affected by cataract are artifically dilated with Tropicacyl Plus solution to illustrate the effect of cataract on the image captured with biometric sensors. The images in the first and third colums, as well as in the second and fourth columns, show cross-sensor iris patterns captured for the same individual.
Comparative analysis of studies on the effect of cataract surgery.
| Parameters | Roizenblatt | Dhir | Seyeddain | Proposed Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total subjects | 55 | 15 | 173 | 132 |
| Single-sensor data | 55 | 15 | 173 | 83 |
| Cross-sensor data | 0 | 0 | 0 | 59 |
| Time from surgery to post-op imaging | 1 month | 2 weeks | 2–24 hours | 2–8 days |
| Number of iris sensors | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Number of recognition systems | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Location | South America | Europe | Europe | Asia |
In a departure from prior methods, we perform cross-sensor iris recognition using multiple pattern matching algorithms. The cross-sensor study performed with multiple matchers allows us to objectively investigate whether the iris pattern changes due to surgical intervention for cataract.
Figure 2(a) Failure of segmentation for subjects in the IIITD Cataract Surgery Database. The first row shows pre-surgery segmentation failures, and the second row shows post-surgery segmentation failures. (b) Successful segmentation of healthy irises using the same matchers. Green: Matcher I, magenta: Matcher II, blue and red: Vatsa et al.[18].
Number of iris samples which failed to be processed, before and after surgical intervention.
| Sensor | Pre-surgery | Post-surgery | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cataract | Specular Reflection | Specular Reflection | Morphological Change | Morphological Change & Specular Reflection | |
| Sensor I | 4 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 2 |
| Sensor II | 8 | 0 | 6 | 8 | 9 |
| Sensor III | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
The incidence of specular reflection acutely increases for post-surgery iris samples.
Matcher I and Matcher II - Genuine Accept Rate (GAR) at 0% False Accept Rate (FAR) for the IIITD Cataract Surgery Database.
| Experiment | Subjects | Pre-Pre (%) | Post-Post (%) | Pre-Post (%) | Healthy Iris (Control) (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matcher I | Sensor I | 49 | 94.29 | 78.37 | 64.33 | 100.00 |
| Sensor II | 74 | 91.20 | 85.16 | 75.19 | 96.11 | |
| Sensor III | 68 | 94.99 | 96.21 | 88.98 | 96.92 | |
| Cross-Sensor | 59 | 91.04 | 88.09 | 79.19 | 95.10 | |
| Matcher II | Sensor I | 49 | 95.07 | 84.01 | 58.67 | 100.00 |
| Sensor II | 74 | 91.89 | 85.70 | 70.86 | 98.44 | |
| Sensor III | 68 | 94.85 | 92.77 | 81.71 | 99.19 | |
| Cross-Sensor | 59 | 91.84 | 83.05 | 78.60 | 98.55 |
Columns 4, 5, 6 respectively represent GAR for matching pre-surgery iris samples to pre-surgery samples, post-surgery samples to post-surgery samples, and pre-surgery samples to post-surgery samples. Column 7 represents matching of healthy iris samples collected from a similar population demographic.
Figure 3Pre-surgery and post-surgery genuine score distributions of different sensors using a commercial matcher. The first three figures correspond to same sensor matching and the last figure corresponds to cross-sensor matching.
Figure 4Post cataract surgery samples collected after one day of surgery.
Characteristics of the IIITD Cataract Surgery Database.
| CaSD Set I | CaSD Set IIA | CaSD Set IIB | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single-sensor data subjects | 49 | 83 | — |
| Cross-sensor data subjects | — | — | 59 |
| Number of sessions | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Samples per session | 4 | 4 | 8 |
| Total Samples | 392 | 664 | 944 |