Future Trends in State Courts 2006 Image Recognition Biometric Technologies Makes Strides

J. Douglas Walker, Consultant, Knowledge and Information Services, National Center for State Courts

Future Trends Statement: Current National Institute of Standards and Technology projects on image-based biometrics reveal impressive gains over the past four years. The justice community, led by law enforcement and corrections but increasingly including the courts, is finding face and iris recognition systems effective for appropriate applications. Courts should prepare to piggyback onto these systems to improve security and the administration of justice.
q q q

Face Recognition Iris Recognition Applying Image Recognition Biometrics to the Justice Community

Although fingerprint technology remains by far the leading biometric technique employed in the criminal justice arena, image-based biometrics is gaining ground. Face and iris recognition technologies, despite their relatively short development histories and lack of extensive databases, offer some distinct advantages over fingerprints in both criminal and noncriminal applications. Recent substantial improvements in accuracy, reliability, and availability of products are accelerating their pace of implementation. As law-enforcement, corrections, and motor-vehicle agencies deploy these systems and establish reliable image databases, courts can share in the benefits with only an incremental cost burden.

Face Recognition
Face recognition, arguably the least invasive biometric technology, has made rapid strides during the last four years. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is wrapping up its Face Recognition Grand Challenge (FRGC) 2006 project, which began in May 2004 with the objective of encouraging commercial and academic organizations to develop vastly improved stilland 3D-image-processing algorithms for facial recognition systems. These algorithms constitute the heart and soul of the computations that enable computer matching of facial images. The baseline for measuring improvement was established by the Face Recognition Vendor Test (FRVT) 2002, which analyzed the effectiveness of the latest available systems at that time. Substantially raising the bar, the FRGC 2006 performance goal is an order of magnitude higher than

that of the FRVT 2002:

q q

FRVT 2002: 20 percent error rate or 80 percent verification rate FRGC 2006: 2 percent error rate or 98 percent verification rate.

(Both goals include a false acceptance rate of 0.1 percent.) Preliminary results from testing the new algorithms on attempting to match sets of images (see example below) are very encouraging: 3D verification rates of 98 percent; high-resolution-still verification rates of 99 percent; and verification of multiple high-resolution-still images approaching 99.99 percent.

One intuitive criterion by which to determine the practical applicability of a face recognition system is whether it can meet, or possibly exceed, human performance. Therefore, the FRGC 2006 evaluations included human control subjects as well as seven different algorithms submitted by commercial organizations and academic institutions. The surprising results? Three out of seven algorithms were better than humans at matching difficult pairs of facial images, and six out of seven were better than humans at matching easy pairs.
[1]

How do these lab-oriented results translate into face recognition solutions that can benefit the courts? While FRGC 2006 was designed to spur development of algorithms, FRVT 2006 is evaluating the overall efficacy of the latest commercially available systems incorporating improved algorithms. FRVT 2006 began in January, and NIST anticipates releasing a final report in the fall. The findings should reveal to what extent real-world systems can deliver the potential accuracy levels of the algorithms on which they are based. The dramatic improvements already indicated by the NIST programs imply that significantly more effective products and systems are emerging for practical consideration in justice applications, which, in turn, will speed up the rate at which face recognition is being adopted, stimulating yet further product development.
[2]

Top

Iris Recognition

Progress in image-based biometrics is not limited to face recognition systems, of course. Iris recognition technologyone of the youngest of all biometric technologiesis moving forward at a fast pace also, in part due to NIST incentive programs similar to its face recognition programs. Iris Challenge Evaluation (ICE) 2005 presented iris recognition challenge problems to encourage and focus technology development. ICE 2006, by contrast, is the independent government technology evaluation of iris recognition, with formal evaluations beginning in June and the final report expected in December 2006. Iris recognition systems analyze the random pattern of a persons iris, and iris images can be computer matched much more accurately than facial images. Indeed, iris recognition is generally acknowledged to be potentially more accurate than any other current biometric technique, although enrollment failure rates (i.e., failing to capture the initial iris image adequately for subsequent comparisons) may be somewhat higher than for fingerprint systems. Because of their accuracy, iris recognition systems have been deployed in recent years for access control in high-security areas such as prisons, government buildings, research laboratories, airports[3], corporate offices, and selected other locations. While iris recognition is more accurate, it is a far more intrusive and inflexible biometric technique than face recognition, requiring one to stand directly before a camera and, for a typical system, no further than 10 inches away from the lens. This intrusive nature makes it less desirable for many court applications, including controlling staff access to restricted areas. However, some of the latest advances promise systems capable of scanning an approaching subjects iris at a greater distance from the camera, which should reduce the most common objections to its implementation. Even so, iris recognition remains best suited to applications where screening subjects are very willing and cooperative or they can be carefully controlled, such as in a prison.
Top

Applying Image Recognition Biometrics to the Justice Community

Law-enforcement, corrections, and motor-vehicle agencies generally are the early adopters of face recognition and other biometric technologies, and court leaders should be planning to capitalize upon their efforts. Often initiated under grant funding, these efforts not only identify good solutions but also establish image databases, protocols, and procedures that can be tapped by the courts. For instance, an arrest-and-booking application that uses facial recognition to identify and track arrestees would have even greater utility if both corrections and courts participated, sharing access to databases. The facial image database used by a local law-enforcement agency for an arrest-andbooking system may already have been made accessible to mobile units in patrol cars and other remote locations to identify suspects. With proper planning, jail management systems could tie into the same database to help control and record prisoner movement and confirm identities for release or transport. Similarly, courts could employ compatible technology and access the database to confirm that the defendant appearing in court is the same individual who was arrested and charged by law enforcement. The following examples of existing justice applications illustrate this point.

The Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) this year joined a growing list of state motorvehicle agencies in implementing facial recognition technology to combat fraud, identity theft, and other crimes. With all 36 RMV locations linked, any new photo taken for a license is compared with the millions of other photos in the state RMV system. Possible matches are displayed, and RMV staff can then make a visual comparison to detect situations such as an existing license for the same person under a different name. The RMV also is piloting a coupling of the facial recognition system with a document validation system that checks for the security features in visas, passports, and other documents used to obtain a drivers license. This increasingly reliable image database represents a rich resource to be tapped by the courts with a relatively modest expenditure for equipment, software, and training.[4] Jefferson County, Missouri, has been using facial recognition technology successfully at the county jails in Birmingham and Bessemer for over a year and hopes to implement it in the courthouses as well. The system matches 30,000 incoming inmates annually against a 500,000-image database of individuals who have previously been in jail, and it also helps prevent mistaken releases. In addition to inmates, the system screens all visitors to the jail and compares them to a database of 5,000 criminals with outstanding warrants, resulting in five arrests already.[5] Pinellas County, Florida, already has implemented facial recognition in the courthouse, following its success with the technology in other applications. With a U.S. Dept. of Justice grant to the sheriffs office, the original system was developed for booking and release processing at the county jail. The technology was next extended to a mobile identification system in patrol cars, then for use by investigators throughout the county. To expand and share its image database, the sheriffs office partnered with other state and local agencies in Florida. In 2002 the technology was installed to screen passengers at the airport. Based on these earlier successes, the sheriff implemented a similar system at the Jail Visitation Center and, finally, the courthouse, where on the first day it correctly identified an individual on the watch list.[6] The Childrens Identification and Location Database (CHILD) Project represents one of the more interesting applications of iris recognition technology. Growing rapidly, it involves a national registry and Web interface managed by the Nations Missing Children Organization and National Center for Missing Adults. Through this project, sheriffs offices and social service agencies can enroll, locate, and identify missing children using iris recognition. More than 1,600 sheriffs offices in 33 states are already participating or will be by the end of 2006.
[7]

Prudent court leaders will stay alert for opportunities to piggyback on such developments in their own justice communities. The exchange of biometric information among entities is facilitated by some of the latest systems on the market that conform to the Global Justice XML Data Model (GJXDM). As courts begin to leverage the GJXDM to participate more fully in the exchange of other types of data, image recognition systems can provide another key mechanism by which to improve the effectiveness of not only the court but also the entire justice system.
Top

[1] It should be noted that all images were of individuals previously unknown to the human subjects. Human recognition abilities for familiar faces are much better than for unfamiliar ones. Difficult and easy categories were determined by a standard control algorithm. [2] See complete information on the NIST image recognition projects at http://face.nist.gov and http://iris.nist.gov.

[3] Primarily for airport staff and certain frequent travelers, although the United Arab Emirates uses iris recognition at all 17 of its air, land, and sea ports to screen an average of 7,000 travelers daily. [4] Scott J. Croteau, RMV Tackling ID Fraud, Worcester Telegram and Gazette (April 18, 2006).

[5] Carol Robinson, ID System Never Forgets a Face, Birmingham News (April 20, 2006).

[6] Facial Recognition in Action, Government Security Magazine ( Aug 1, 2004 ). [7] http://www.thechildproject.org.

Future Trends in State Courts is a product of Knowledge and Information Services Office.

Copyright 2006 The National Center for State Courts. All Rights Reserved.