IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/oropre/v57y2009i5p1068-1081.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Effective Two-Finger, Two-Stage Biometric Strategy for the US-VISIT Program

Author

Listed:
  • Manas Baveja

    (London, United Kingdom)

  • Lawrence M. Wein

    (Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305)

Abstract

Motivated by the cost and disruption involved in changing from a two-finger to a ten-finger biometric system for matching U.S. visitors to a watchlist of criminals and terrorists, we investigate whether any two-finger multistage biometric strategies would fix the inadequate matching performance of poor-quality prints that plagues the U.S. Government's original two-finger, single-stage biometric system. For several multistage strategies, we solve the Stackelberg game in which the U.S. Government chooses the biometric threshold levels to maximize the detection probability subject to constraints on the false positive probability and on the mean time per visitor to perform biometric screening, and the terrorist chooses the fingerprint image quality to minimize his detection probability. The first stage of all the strategies uses the current minutiae-based fingerprint matching system, but with thresholds that depend on image quality, which in isolation achieves a detection probability of 0.771. Using face recognition (based on 2002 data) in the second stage increases the detection probability to 0.841, whereas using a slower and more thorough texture-based fingerprint matcher in the second stage leads to a detection probability of at least 0.913 and perhaps significantly higher. (Data for the texture matcher is only available for the poorest-quality prints and we assume that this is its performance for all prints.) Adding face recognition as a third stage to this latter system does not improve performance. The two-finger, two-stage strategy may be comparable in performance to the ten-finger, single-stage strategy (which has a detection probability of 0.937), is robust against gaming and poor image acquisition, requires no additional hardware, and would generate no visible changes from the original two-finger, single-stage system from a visitor's viewpoint. The uncertainty in our performance estimates needs to be better quantified, ideally with raw data on similarity scores, before recommending this strategy for implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Manas Baveja & Lawrence M. Wein, 2009. "An Effective Two-Finger, Two-Stage Biometric Strategy for the US-VISIT Program," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 1068-1081, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:57:y:2009:i:5:p:1068-1081
    DOI: 10.1287/opre.1090.0710
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.1090.0710
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/opre.1090.0710?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lawrence M. Wein, 2009. "OR Forum---Homeland Security: From Mathematical Models to Policy Implementation: The 2008 Philip McCord Morse Lecture," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 801-811, August.
    2. Shan, Xiaojun & Zhuang, Jun, 2013. "Hybrid defensive resource allocations in the face of partially strategic attackers in a sequential defender–attacker game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 262-272.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:57:y:2009:i:5:p:1068-1081. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.