1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to document processing, document imaging, and magnetic ink character recognition. The invention further relates to hand-operated document readers/imagers, and to methods and systems for linking front and rear images in a document reader/imager.
2. Background Art
A typical document processing system includes a feeder and a separator in the document-feeding portion of the system, and a series of roller pairs or belts in the document-transporting portion of the system. In the feeding portion of the system, the feeder acts with the separator to feed documents singly, in order, from a stack. In the transporting portion of the system, the roller pairs and/or belts convey the documents, one at a time, past other processing devices such as readers, printers, and sorters that perform operations on the documents. The feeder is typically a feed wheel, but may take other forms. The separator may be a wheel, but also may take other forms such as a belt. Further, the components in the transporting portion of the system may take a variety of forms.
In addition to large document processing systems that handle stacks of documents, smaller systems also exist. These smaller document processing systems may handle smaller stacks of documents, or may even handle single documents, fed one at a time. There are also hand-operated document readers/imagers.
Banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions use document processing systems to regularly process checks, deposit slips, and other types of bank documents in order to execute financial transactions efficiently. Document processing systems have therefore become quite prevalent in the industry. Typically, information is printed on these documents in magnetic ink which can be read both by the human eye and a computer. This form of printing is read by a process called magnetic ink character recognition (MICR). As part of the recognition process, a MICR magnetic read head is used to read the information printed on the document.
Conventional approaches to MICR reading and recognition generally involve determining peak position information for a waveform generated by a single gap magnetic read head. This peak information typically includes information regarding the amount of time between the peaks of each character. Knowledge of the velocity of the document (and thus, the velocity of the characters which are printed on the document) allows this time information to be converted into distance information, which can be compared to the MICR character peak profiles as contained in the ANSI X9.27-2000 “Print and Test Specifications for Magnetic Ink Printing (MICR)” as promulgated by the American National Standards Institute. Based on the design of the standard E-13B character set, in order that a MICR reader reliably read with a high correct character read rate and with a very low substitution rate, the document velocity must be precisely known during reading or otherwise be speed-controlled so that it does not vary.
These conventional approaches are acceptable when the velocity of the document is either known or can be controlled. In fact, conventional approaches to MICR typically involve rather complex schemes for controlling the velocity of the document or attempting to measure its velocity at different times as the document moves past the MICR read head. There has also been an approach to MICR reading and recognition that utilizes a dual gap read head to eliminate the need for precise knowledge or control of the document velocity.
In a hand-operated document reader/imager, the document is placed on a base and the MICR/image device is moved over the document from right to left, which is the traditional direction of larger document readers. During this movement, the MICR characters are recognized and the front image of the document is captured.
In order to capture the rear image of the document, the document must be removed from the base of the hand-operated check reader/imager, flipped over, and placed back on the base. This manual step in the processing could lead to errors. The operator could place a different document on the base.
For the foregoing reasons, there is a need for a method that will verify that the original document was placed back on the hand-operated check reader so as to avoid the accidental association of a front image with an incorrect rear image.
It is an object of the invention to provide an improved method and system for linking front and rear images in a document reader/imager that reduce the likelihood of accidentally associating a front image with an incorrect rear image.
The invention comprehends linking the front and rear images with the MICR code line. According to the invention, during the capture of the front image, the MICR code line is read/recognized (converted to text characters) according to a traditional, “forward” MICR algorithm. During the capture of the rear image, the MICR code line is read/recognized (converted to text characters) according to a “reverse” MICR algorithm.
The “reverse” MICR algorithm compares the MICR signal from the document with patterns that are expected when the document is processed backwards. These patterns include the MICR signal being reversed and inverted, having a lower amplitude, and having lower quality. If the “reverse” MICR algorithm is successful in recognizing each character, then this result can be used confidently for the document.
The code line obtained during the front image capture and the code line obtained during the rear image capture are then compared. If the code lines do not match, this indicates an error and the operator may be instructed to check the document. The front image of the document could be displayed to the operator in order to prompt the operator to locate the correct document for rear image capture.
The advantages associated with embodiments of the invention are numerous. For example, methods and systems of the invention for linking front and rear images may be utilized in hand-operated document readers/imagers to assure that the same document is used for the front capture and corresponding rear capture. Further, methods and systems of the invention may also be utilized in other document processing systems to provide additional data integrity. That is, embodiments of the invention may be employed in hand-operated document readers/imagers, and may be employed in document processing systems including automated document readers/imagers when both sides of the documents are read using either multiple devices or a multiple-pass approach.
In most applications, the characters are first magnetized prior to the characters being presented past the read heads. As shown, each unit on the x-axis represents 0.013 inches. The first character peak is aligned with the first position and the remaining peaks generally align with other vertical grid lines because the MICR characters/symbols are designed using increments of 0.013 inches in the horizontal direction. For those cases where the change in magnetic flux is not perfectly aligned, it is caused by the effects of the radii shifting the position of the maximum rate of change to the left.
Examples are the character “3”,
In
An exemplary embodiment of the invention is illustrated in
MICR read head 126 is for reading the magnetic ink character data 142 on document 140. During the front image capture, the MICR code line is read according to a traditional, “forward” MICR algorithm as MICR read head 126 passes from right to left over the magnetic ink character data 142 on document 140. During the rear image capture, the MICR code line is read according to a “reverse” MICR algorithm as MICR read head 126 passes from right to left over document 140. In this way, the characters are read in reverse order. In order to read the MICR code line during rear image capture, the “reverse” MICR algorithm compares the MICR signal from the document with patterns that are expected when the document is processed from the back.
In the traditional, “forward” MICR algorithm, the waveform obtained from the read head 126 is compared against known MICR character peak profiles 152 (
In accordance with the invention, logic 150 further includes a “reverse” MICR algorithm that is utilized to process a face-down document during rear image capture. More specifically, when a document/item that is being read by read head 126 and processed by reading and recognition logic 150 is a document that is face-down for rear image capture, the waveform obtained from the read head 126 is compared against patterns that are expected when the document is processed face-down, that is, backwards, with the magnetic ink characters being read in reverse as read head 126 passes from right to left over the document 140. The face-down document will generate a waveform that is reversed and inverted. The waveform is reversed because the characters/symbols will be read in the reverse order as the read head passes over the document because the document is face-down. Because the flux change when the leading edge of the character string reaches the read head is positive, the first sensed peak is always a positive peak. Accordingly, when the document is face-down, the waveform is inverted. In addition, the waveform will likely have reduced amplitude and signal quality due to the read head 126 reading through the document 140 because the magnetic ink is on the far side of the document due to the document being oriented face-down.
In the “reverse” MICR algorithm, the waveform obtained from the read head 126 is still compared against known MICR character peak profiles 152 (
In accordance with the invention, the MICR code line recognized during the front image capture and the MICR code line recognized during the rear image capture are compared to assure that the same document was used for front and rear image capture. More specifically, the front and rear images are linked by the MICR code line. If the code line recognized during front image capture does not agree with the code line recognized during rear image capture, this indicates an error and an operator may be instructed to check the document. The front image of the document may be displayed to the operator in order to prompt the operator to locate the correct document for rear image capture.
It is appreciated that one approach to implementing the invention requires that both MICR code lines are fully recognized and match each other to assure that the same document is used for both front image capture and rear image capture. However, it is appreciated that the MICR code line obtained during front image capture may be deemed to be the correct code line, and the MICR code line obtained during rear image capture need not be fully recognized. Put another way, a partial recognition of the MICR code line during rear image capture may be sufficient to verify that it is in fact the same document as used previously for the front image capture. For example, some applications may only require that a predetermined percentage of the characters match. In addition, it is to be appreciated that methods and systems of the invention may be utilized in other document processing systems to provide additional data integrity, including systems that have automated document readers/imagers when both sides of the documents are read using either multiple devices or a multiple-pass approach.
The waveform obtained during rear image capture is still compared against the known MICR character peak profiles, but the waveform is compared against patterns that would be expected when the document is processed from the back. Put another way, the backwards document produces a reversed and inverted waveform. This waveform may be corrected and then compared against the normal peak profiles, or the uncorrected waveform may be compared against a set of modified peak profiles. The particular details of the comparison may vary, with the important fact being that consideration is given to the fact that the original waveform is reversed, inverted, and possibly has reduced amplitude and signal quality due to the document being read from the back.
At block 178, the MICR code line obtained during the front image capture (as determined by the “forward” MICR algorithm at block 172) is compared to the MICR code line obtained during the rear image capture (as determined by the “reverse” MICR algorithm at block 176). According to decision block 180, if the code line recognized during front image capture does not agree with the code line recognized during rear image capture, this indicates an error and an operator may be instructed to check the document as depicted at block 184. In the event that the code lines agree, normal document processing continues as indicated at block 182.
While embodiments of the invention have been illustrated and described, it is not intended that these embodiments illustrate and describe all possible forms of the invention. Rather, the words used in the specification are words of description rather than limitation, and it is understood that various changes may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3092809 | Merritt et al. | Jun 1963 | A |
3096506 | Chao et al. | Jul 1963 | A |
3104381 | Gottschalk et al. | Sep 1963 | A |
3185962 | Ingham | May 1965 | A |
3201751 | Rabinow | Aug 1965 | A |
3212058 | Sanner | Oct 1965 | A |
3221303 | Bradley | Nov 1965 | A |
3245534 | Smith et al. | Apr 1966 | A |
3246293 | Shelton, Jr. | Apr 1966 | A |
3270320 | Christie | Aug 1966 | A |
3316536 | Andrews et al. | Apr 1967 | A |
3461427 | Parker | Aug 1969 | A |
3521235 | Becker | Jul 1970 | A |
3528058 | Bond | Sep 1970 | A |
3541508 | Vaccaro | Nov 1970 | A |
3571793 | Britt | Mar 1971 | A |
3593030 | Jaskowsky | Jul 1971 | A |
3605092 | Richard | Sep 1971 | A |
3629822 | Johnson | Dec 1971 | A |
3629829 | Ordower | Dec 1971 | A |
3638238 | Milford et al. | Jan 1972 | A |
3744025 | Bilgutay | Jul 1973 | A |
3764978 | Tyburski et al. | Oct 1973 | A |
3851309 | Kenney et al. | Nov 1974 | A |
3873973 | Acker | Mar 1975 | A |
3876981 | Welch | Apr 1975 | A |
3912909 | Harrison | Oct 1975 | A |
3949363 | Holm | Apr 1976 | A |
3978450 | Sanner et al. | Aug 1976 | A |
4143355 | MacIntyre | Mar 1979 | A |
4201978 | Nally | May 1980 | A |
4245211 | Kao | Jan 1981 | A |
4260880 | Thomas | Apr 1981 | A |
4277689 | Thomas et al. | Jul 1981 | A |
4277775 | Nally et al. | Jul 1981 | A |
4277776 | Nally et al. | Jul 1981 | A |
4326258 | de la Guardia | Apr 1982 | A |
4356390 | Feilchenfeld | Oct 1982 | A |
4356472 | Hau-Chun Ku et al. | Oct 1982 | A |
4389634 | Nakamura | Jun 1983 | A |
4396902 | Warthan et al. | Aug 1983 | A |
4399553 | Toyama | Aug 1983 | A |
4408342 | Grabowski et al. | Oct 1983 | A |
4441204 | Hanna | Apr 1984 | A |
4510615 | Rohrer | Apr 1985 | A |
4523330 | Cain | Jun 1985 | A |
4542829 | Emery et al. | Sep 1985 | A |
4547899 | Nally et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4684998 | Tanioka et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4722444 | Murphy et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4776021 | Ho | Oct 1988 | A |
4797938 | Will | Jan 1989 | A |
4815107 | Kishimoto et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4817176 | Marshall et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4821332 | Durham | Apr 1989 | A |
4827531 | Milford | May 1989 | A |
4876735 | Martin et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
4914710 | Ward et al. | Apr 1990 | A |
4968419 | Karalus et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
4969054 | Tsuji et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
5014325 | Moritomo | May 1991 | A |
5054092 | LaCaze | Oct 1991 | A |
5063599 | Concannon et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
5091961 | Baus, Jr. | Feb 1992 | A |
5293431 | Hayduchok et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5347593 | Klinefelter | Sep 1994 | A |
5464099 | Stevens et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5488676 | Harding, Jr. | Jan 1996 | A |
5540338 | Stevens et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5679942 | Toyama | Oct 1997 | A |
5689579 | Josephson | Nov 1997 | A |
5729621 | Marshall et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5737440 | Kunkler | Apr 1998 | A |
5784503 | Bleecker et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5790260 | Myers | Aug 1998 | A |
5965862 | Momose | Oct 1999 | A |
6103985 | Shell et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6243504 | Kruppa | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6351553 | Hayosh | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6473519 | Pidhirny et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6504946 | Rossignoli | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6547078 | Lile et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6621920 | Koike | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6654487 | Downs, Jr. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6659347 | Moore et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6863214 | Garner et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6924450 | Maloney | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6928183 | Mitchell et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
7177840 | Maloney | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7219831 | Murata | May 2007 | B2 |
7327868 | Perner et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7474779 | Duncan | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7474780 | Volpa | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7558418 | Verma et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7590275 | Clarke et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7647275 | Jones | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7665655 | Johannesson et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7711176 | Rossignoli | May 2010 | B2 |
7715633 | Kanamoto et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7735721 | Ma et al. | Jun 2010 | B1 |
20010045452 | Momose et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020067846 | Foley | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020184151 | Maloney | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030214689 | Johannesson et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040062431 | O'Neill | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040076320 | Downs, Jr. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040130337 | Clark | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050012967 | Okamura | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050018896 | Heit et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050041268 | Panini | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050047641 | Volpa | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050074159 | Mitchell et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050127160 | Fujikawa | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050139671 | McGlamery et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050163362 | Jones et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050178834 | Natsuno | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050213804 | Simmons | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060045321 | Yu | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060110023 | Goetz et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060182331 | Gilson et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060182332 | Weber | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20070045930 | Hayduchok et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070203715 | Kane | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070217669 | Swift et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070288382 | Narayanan et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080137939 | Wang et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |