This invention relates to systems and methods for acquiring biometric and other imagery, biometric acquisition, identification, fraud detection, and security systems and methods, particularly biometric systems and methods which employ iris recognition. More particularly the invention relates to systems and methods for acquiring iris data for iris recognition.
Iris recognition systems have been in use for some time. The acquisition of images suitable for iris recognition is inherently a challenging problem. The performance of recognition algorithms depends on the quality, i.e., sharpness and contrast, of the image of the iris of the subject who is to be identified. This is due to many reasons. As an example, the iris itself is relatively small (approximately 1 cm in diameter) and it is often required to observe it from a great distance in order to avoid constraining the position of the subject or when the subject is walking or riding. This results in a small field of view and also a small depth of field. As a second example, it is generally difficult for the adult or child subject to stay absolutely still. As a third example, the subject may blink involuntarily or drop or swivel their head momentarily to check on the whereabouts of luggage.
In biometric identification applications, due to unconstrained motion of cooperative or non-compliant subject, it has been very difficult to acquire iris images with sufficient quality for recognition and identification processing. For example, iris acquisition systems typically check whether the quality of an acquired image exceeds a threshold. Many methods of assessing quality have been developed, such as those based on a measurement of focus such as those disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,753,919,
The problem with this approach is that if the acquired image quality does not exceed the threshold, then the data is not acquired, despite the fact that there may never be another opportunity to acquire data from that subject again. More specifically, in the case of unconstrained users or non-cooperative subjects, it may be impossible to have the subject position themselves or wait until the acquired image data exceeds the quality threshold. For example, the subject may be distracted with their head turning in various directions, or they may be in the process of performing another task, such as boarding a bus, so that the opportunity to acquire data from them has already come and gone. More specifically, prior iris data acquisition systems have typically been designed to explicitly avoid capturing lower quality data with an emphasis on waiting or constraining the user such that only highest quality data is acquired. We have determined that even a lower quality iris image (blurred, for example) can still contain substantial evidence for matching, albeit not with the precision of a high quality iris image. However, we still wish to acquire high quality data when it is possible to do so. In another example of prior systems, for example those disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,151,583, autofocus routines are used to attempt to obtain high quality iris images. However, autofocus routines cause lag times and inaccuracy, resulting in poor quality or even non-existent imaging. Other systems, such as the ones disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,753,919 by Daugman, use sensors to assist a subject in aligning and focusing a handheld video camera.
Most if not all automatic focus systems work by acquiring an image of the scene, processing the image to recover a measure of focus, using that measure of focus to move a lens-focus actuator, and then repeating the steps of image acquisition, processing and actuation many times until it is determined in the processing step that focus has been reached. In most iris recognition systems autofocus never is able to catch up with the actual position of the subject unless the subject is relatively stationary, due to the unusually low depth of field in iris recognition, as well as the requirement that the focus has to be on the iris (as opposed to the nose for example).
Because of the time delays involved in acquiring an image, processing the image, and mechanical actuation, it is impossible for auto-focus algorithms to respond instantaneously. Moreover, as the depth of field reduces, as is typically the case in iris recognition, where the object is small and is typically observed at high magnification, it becomes more difficult for auto-focus algorithms to be successful because any error in the auto-focus position is much more apparent in the imagery since the depth of field is small.
It is much more difficult for auto-focus to acquire in-focus imagery of a subject who is moving even slightly (fractions of an inch).
In the case of a person moving even slightly because there is a finite control loop time for standard auto-focus to actuate, it can be shown that if a component of the person's motion is high frequency and above the control loop response time, then the auto-focus will never be able to converge and acquire an in-focus image of the person. The auto-focus will be continually “hunting” for a focused image and will always lag the motion of the subject. The result is that the subject has to be rock solid and still when standard auto-focus is used, and this was the state of the art in iris recognition before the present invention.
Prior attempts to solve these autofocus problems use the same closed loop approach but assume a subject is moving in a straight line and then use the image measurements to try and predict where the person will be in the next frame. This approach is not very robust and also fails for random movement that subjects often have. Other auto-focus systems use different ways of computing focus measures in the scene in one or more regions to compute the most accurate focus score. When a subject is moving with frequencies that are beyond the control loop of an auto-focus algorithm auto-focus algorithms are unable to catch up to the person's motion and acquire a good image of the person.
Martin, et al., US Pat. Pub. 2008/0075335, disclose a biometric image selection method which reduces the rate of non-exploitable images which are supplied to an analysis and identification processing module using sharpness and contrast criteria. In some embodiments Martin et al. locate a pattern in each image of a sequence of images, estimate the speed of displacement of the pattern between two successive images in the sequence, and select images for which the estimated speed of displacement of the pattern is lower than a speed threshold. Martin et al. disclosed embodiments wherein two selection modules are provided, the first being a quick selection module and the second being a pupil tracking module, rejecting an image if it is below a contrast or sharpness threshold. The selection module in some embodiments selects images having the highest sharpness and/or contrast out of the images stored. Martin et al do not disclose a system or method for acquiring the series of images, nor do they disclose storing only images having higher quality than previously stored images and removing the lesser quality image from memory storage.
The foregoing disadvantages and problems are overcome by the present invention which automatically acquires a series of images, analyzes the images for quality, and stores only the best quality image, not necessarily dependent on whether the quality exceeds a predetermined threshold, thereby saving memory and assuring that at least one image is stored, even if not having a quality exceeding a threshold. In a second embodiment, the system which does not require an auto-focusing system but rather automatically acquires a series of images at different focus settings regardless of the quality of images previously acquired, analyzes the images for quality, and stores only the best quality image, not necessarily dependent on whether the quality exceeds a predetermined threshold, thereby saving memory and assuring that at least one image is stored, even if not having a quality exceeding a threshold. The invention is an iris image acquisition system that, over the smallest possible time period for a particular subject, stores successively better quality images of the iris among the images acquired by the acquisition system to ensure that at least some biometric data of the subject is acquired, while at the same time accounting for arbitrary and rapid subject motion, and voluntary or involuntary subject actions such as, for example, eye blinks or head twists, all with a minimal memory requirement.
The invention is directed to acquiring iris images of optimum quality for further processing which comprises matching iris images of unknown subjects to iris image templates of known subjects. In another aspect the invention comprises a system and method of acquiring iris images having the best focus without use of autofocus systems or methods. In another aspect the invention comprises a method of acquiring iris images comprising deploying a lens with a controllable adjustable focus; and adjusting focus without feedback from a focus measurement value. In some embodiments the lens is scanned over a range of focus values. The system of the invention controls the lens to have an opportunistic capture which scans through different slices of depth volume, acquiring data. The quality of the image capture is calculated using algorithms which, for example, analyze for sharpness and or contrast, or other parameters indicative of quality and suitability for further biometric processing. The system of the invention can use algorithms looking for an absolute measure of eye focus, since an eye has some generic features in common across large populations, or for a peak in the focus measure as images are acquired over the range of focuses scanned.
These and other objects, features, and advantages of embodiments are presented in greater detail in the following description when read in relation to the drawings, but not limited to these figures, in which:
While the invention is capable of many embodiments, only a few illustrative embodiments are described below.
Referring first to
Upon initiating the acquisition, a local list of successively better images from the prior subject is cleared 101 in preparation for the next subject.
An image is then acquired 102 using a camera system. A camera system is used that can either capture images synchronously at a constant rate, or asynchronously on request by a computer-controlled trigger signal. As discussed later, the camera may be operated at a variable acquisition rate depending on the results of previous processing.
A Quality Metric module comprising, for example, one or more of the following sub-modules: face detector, eye detector, focus measurement, iris area detector is used 103 to measure the quality of each acquired image in sequence when sufficient computing capacity is available but not necessarily simultaneously with image acquisition. As discussed later, one or all of these modules may be performed at a particular time instant depending on the results of previous processing. The quality analysis and selection system of Martin et al in US 2008/0075335, supra, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety, is one suitable Quality Metric system 103 for the purposes of the current invention, with the additional feature of the present invention wherein only the best or a small, limited number of the highest quality of the acquired images is stored in memory.
An Acquisition Stopped module 104 is to perform an Acquisition Stopped routine. This module 104 ensures that the overall process is not being performed unnecessarily if, for example; the subject has walked away without any data being acquired. The Acqusition Stopped module may consist of a time-out counter that compares to a threshold the difference between the current time and the time that the Acquisition process was started. The process for a particular subject can be terminated 109 or the last image can be stored 107 if a better 103 image than the best quality image stored at 110 is calculated.
A Comparator module 105 then compares the results of the Quality Metric Module with the results stored in a Local List in storage module 110. In the first iteration of the process, there will be no data in the Local List in storage module 110. However, after several iterations, some data may be present within the Local List 110. If the results of the Quality Metric Module 103 are greater than any of those on the Local List 110, then the imagery data is stored on the Local List, Storage may comprise appending the imagery data to the Local List 110, or may comprise replacing 107 imagery data on the Local List that has a lower Quality Metric 103 value.
Step 108 is optional, as indicated by the box shown with broken lines. In certain embodiments where step 108 is absent, additional imagery is acquired automatically without changing focus values but is rather acquired at a fixed focus, the quality of imagery depending on the exact location of a moving subject within the capture volume at the time successive images are acquired. In certain other embodiments when module 108 is present, the focus setting of the camera acquisition system is independently modified prior to acquiring the next image. Several methods for modifying the focus setting can be employed as discussed later.
After the focus has been modified, then imagery is once again acquired 102 in the next iteration of the process.
The process continues until 109 either the timeout condition described above occurs, or the Quality Metric 103 exceeds a value.
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring to
The method is highly effective in many respects. A first advantage of the invention is if the disposition of the subject is immediately amenable to successful data acquisition (e.g. eyes are open and their face is facing the system), then the system will acquire iris imagery very rapidly. There are many methods for detecting the presence of an eye. For example, the Hough Transform disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 3,069,654 can be configured to locate circular segments of the eye due to the iris/sclera boundary and the pupil/iris boundary.
However, if the subject is fidgeting or unable to remain stationary, or is distracted by baggage or children for example, then the acquisition system will still acquire imagery, although it might take a slightly longer period of time. However, the acquisition time for an amenable subject will not be penalized by the system's delays in acquiring data in the case of a less amenable subject. This is crucial when subject throughput is considered. This is to be contrasted with systems that may acquire and store a large number of images and then perform processing on the images to select imagery.
A second advantage of the invention is the ability to acquire successively better iris imagery. In the current art, iris image acquisition systems typically have resulted in the output of one image of the iris deemed to have a quality suitable for matching, usually exceeding a threshold. If such an image is not found, then no iris data is captured. The problem with the current art is that there are some applications when there will not be a second chance to acquire better data since the subject has gone elsewhere or is fed up with using the system. Ironically, however, the iris imagery they presented may have had plenty of information for the particular application at hand. For example, if the image acquisition system is to be used to gain entry into a house with only 100 subjects, then some of the iris imagery acquired earlier in the acquisition process may be sufficient.
A third advantage of the invention is the efficient use of memory, which is significant especially when an embedded device is used. The Local List contains only iris imagery that is successively of better quality than the prior imagery, and does not contain the imagery that was originally acquired. In addition, depending on the application, the Local List can comprise a single image which is replaced each time imagery of a better quality is detected. After processing is complete, then the resultant image remaining in the Local List is the imagery acquired of the best quality.
In one embodiment, the invention obtains in-focus images by using a focus controller component that controls the lens to focus at successively different points within a focus range, such scan control performed without any input from measurement of whether the image is in focus or out of focus, be it based from measurements of the image or other distance metrics to the subject. In terms of focus scan speed and how it relates to frame rate, exposure time these relationships and related algorithms are known to those skilled in this alt.
Even when a subject is trying to stand still, there will be residual motion. The system in some embodiments can increase or decrease the rate of image capture at different focuses in view of the degree of motion of the subject.
The system acquires a varying number of images, to account for the fact that in some cases we may acquire a good image on the first image acquisition, but in other cases may have to wait for 10 or 20 image acquisitions or more. If the system simply fixed the number of image acquisitions to be 10 or 20, then we would dramatically slow down the average time it takes to use the device, and therefore reduce the throughput of people using the device, since the number of image acquisitions acquired would be set at the worst case, rather than being adaptive based on the quality of the iris.
It is not good enough to have the focus set at the correct focal distance opportunistically since, for example, the subject may blink or turn away even though the image is in focus.
If 10 or 20 or more images are being acquired, storing them can take up a lot of memory, which can be expensive in an embedded device. The system of the invention successively checks whether the iris image quality is better than the best iris image stored previously and only in that case does the system store it. Alternatively the system can overwrite the best iris image acquired so far to replace it with the better image. In this way, the system always has the best possible iris image stored without having to use extensive memory. If the subject turns away and the system loses its opportunity to ever again acquire iris data of a subject, the best possible image, even if not of high quality, will be stored and such image may have sufficient quality for biometric identification under the circumstances.
In addition to the area to which the camera is pointed, we also can control a focus control system such that a capture volume is swept through. Unlike autofocus which requires settling time, and many discontinuous stop/start steps that eventually can wear down components and can take time to respond, we simply sweep through a focus volume rapidly, in order to opportunistically acquire biometric imagery.
While the invention has been described and illustrated in detail herein, various other embodiments, alternatives, and modifications should become apparent to those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. The claims should not be considered limited to the illustrated embodiments, therefore.
The present application is a National Stage application of International Application No. PCT/US08/74737, filed on Sep. 29, 2008 which claims priority from provisional application 60/969,607, filed Sep. 1, 2007, which is hereby incorporated by reference.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2008/074737 | 8/29/2008 | WO | 00 | 2/25/2010 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2009/029757 | 3/5/2009 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4231661 | Walsh et al. | Nov 1980 | A |
4641349 | Flom et al. | Feb 1987 | A |
5259040 | Hanna | Nov 1993 | A |
5291560 | Daugman | Mar 1994 | A |
5488675 | Hanna | Jan 1996 | A |
5572596 | Wildes et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5581629 | Hanna et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5613012 | Hoffman et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5615277 | Hoffman | Mar 1997 | A |
5737439 | Lapsley et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5764789 | Pare et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5802199 | Pare et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5805719 | Pare et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5838812 | Pare et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5901238 | Matsushita | May 1999 | A |
5953440 | Zhang et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5978494 | Zhang | Nov 1999 | A |
6021210 | Camus et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6028949 | McKendall | Feb 2000 | A |
6064752 | Rozmus et al. | May 2000 | A |
6069967 | Rozmus et al. | May 2000 | A |
6144754 | Okano et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6192142 | Pare et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6247813 | Kim et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6252977 | Salganicoff et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6289113 | McHugh et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6320610 | Van Sant et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6366682 | Hoffman et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6373968 | Okano et al. | Apr 2002 | B2 |
6377699 | Musgrave et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6424727 | Musgrave et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6483930 | Musgrave et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6532298 | Cambier et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6542624 | Oda | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6546121 | Oda | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6594376 | Hoffman et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6594377 | Kim et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6652099 | Chae et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6700998 | Murata | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6714665 | Hanna et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6760467 | Min et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6850631 | Oda et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6917695 | Teng et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6980670 | Hoffman et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6985608 | Hoffman et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7095901 | Lee et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7146027 | Kim et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7209271 | Lewis et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7212330 | Seo et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7248719 | Hoffman et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7271939 | Kono | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7385626 | Aggarwal et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7414737 | Cottard et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7418115 | Northcott et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7428320 | Northcott et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7542590 | Robinson et al. | Jun 2009 | B1 |
7558406 | Robinson et al. | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7558407 | Hoffman et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7574021 | Matey | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7583822 | Guillemot et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7606401 | Hoffman et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7616788 | Hsieh et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7639840 | Hanna et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7693307 | Rieul et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7697786 | Camus et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7715595 | Kim et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7719566 | Guichard | May 2010 | B2 |
7797606 | Chabanne | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7869627 | Northcott et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7929732 | Bringer et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7978883 | Rouh et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8009876 | Kim et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8025399 | Northcott et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8092021 | Northcott et al. | Jan 2012 | B1 |
8132912 | Northcott et al. | Mar 2012 | B1 |
8170295 | Fujii et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8233680 | Bringer et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8243133 | Northcott et al. | Aug 2012 | B1 |
8279042 | Beenau et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8317325 | Raguin et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
20020110286 | Cheatle et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20030151674 | Lin | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20050084137 | Kim et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20060074986 | Mallalieu et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20070211922 | Crowley et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080031610 | Border et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20090074256 | Haddad | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090097715 | Cottard et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090161925 | Cottard et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090231096 | Bringer et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090278922 | Tinker et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100021016 | Cottard et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100074477 | Fujii et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100127826 | Saliba et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100246903 | Cottard | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100278394 | Raguin et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100310070 | Bringer et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110158486 | Bringer et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110194738 | Choi et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110277518 | Lais et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120240223 | Tu | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120257797 | Leyvand et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2007-249556 | Sep 2007 | JP |
10-2009-0086891 | Aug 2009 | KR |
10-2010-0049407 | May 2010 | KR |
WO-2008054396 | May 2008 | WO |
WO-2010062371 | Jun 2010 | WO |
WO-2011093538 | Aug 2011 | WO |
Entry |
---|
B. Galvin, et al., Recovering Motion Fields: An Evaluation of Eight Optical Flow Algorithms, Proc. of the British Machine Vision Conf. (1998). |
International Search Report on PCT/US2012/025468 dated Sep. 14, 2012. |
J. R. Bergen, et al., Hierarchical Model-Based Motion Estimation, European Conf. on Computer Vision (1993). |
K. Nishino, et al., The World in an Eye, IEEE Conf. on Pattern Recognition, vol. 1, at pp. 444-451 (Jun. 2004). |
Notice of Allowance on U.S. Appl. No. 12/658,706 dated Feb. 24, 2012. |
R. Kumar, et al., Direct recovery of shape from multiple views: a parallax based approach, 12th IAPR Int'l Conf. on Pattern Recognition. |
R. P. Wildes, Iris Recognition: An Emerging Biometric Technology, Proc. IEEE 85(9) at pp. 1348-1363 (Sep. 1997). |
Written Opinion on PCT/US2012/025468 dated Sep. 14, 2012. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100232655 A1 | Sep 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60969607 | Sep 2007 | US |