Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jul 28.
Published in final edited form as: IEEE Access. 2020 Mar 13;8:59007–59014. doi: 10.1109/access.2020.2980755

TABLE 1.

Performance of the proposed and state-of-the-art presentation attack detectionsa.

APCER
Inkjet W-Inkjet Laser W-Laser Surface Philips Mask Warm LED BPCER F-score
DoG-PAD 13.3 2.2 14.4 6.7 26.7 40 26.4 13.3 38.9 51.2
MTA-PAD 8.9 0 5.6 1.1 20 6.7 97.2 3.3 8.9 62.6
T-PAD 0 0 0 0 0 0 48.6 0 5.6 81.0
CTA-PAD 0 0 0 0 6.7 0 73.6 0 7.8 73.1
Multi-spectral PAD 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.3 100 1.1 72.7
Light-field PAD 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 41.7 0 3.3 83.3
Plenoptic PAD 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.2 0 4.4 96.1
a

Acronyms and abbreviations: APCER attack presentation classification error rate; BPCER bona fide presentation classification error rate; Inkjet photos printed by a inkjet printer; W-Inkjet wrapped photos printed by an inkjet printer; Laser photos printed by a laser printer; W-Laser wrapped photos printed by a laser printer; Philips, digital photos displayed by a Philips screen; Surface, digital photos displayed by a Surface Pro laptop; Mask 3D face masks; Warm LED, Printed photos illuminated by a warm LED.