Fig 1.
Four comparison numbers (‘02436’, ‘2436’, ‘436’, ‘36’) are matched with the target number (‘3402436’), and the right answer is ‘Five’ which is the length of ‘02436’.
Fig 2.
Eye movement trajectories of three different participants.
Fig 3.
Gabor wavelets and the texture feature extraction process.
(a). Gabor wavelets in 11 scales and 8 orientations. (b). ①: Gabor wavelet transform, ②: Calculation of the mean and the variance of texture image’s gray value.
Fig 4.
Fifty-eight Participants’ Average Reaction Time (a) and Accuracy Rates (b) in 8 Tests.
Fig 5.
The GWT method’s EERs calculated with different parameter.
(a). EER results based on STset, (b). EER results based on LTset.
Fig 6.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Table 1.
EERs and Rank-1 IRs of GWT method.
Fig 7.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Fig 8.
DET Curves for the LVD method.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Fig 9.
CMC curves for the LVD method.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Table 2.
EERs and Rank-1 IRs for the LVD method.
Fig 10.
EER Results corresponding to different similarity measures.
Fig 11.
DET curves for the FDM method.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Fig 12.
CMC curves for the FDM method.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Table 3.
EERs and Rank-1 IRs for the FDM method.
Fig 13.
DET Curves for the CEM method.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Fig 14.
CMC curves for the CEM method.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Table 4.
EERs and Rank-1 IRs for the CEM method.
Fig 15.
DET Curves for the GI methods.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Fig 16.
(a). Results based on STset, (b). Results based on LTset.
Table 5.
EERs and Rank-1 IRs for the GI method.
Table 6.
Results comparison with same method but a different stimulus.
Table 7.
Results comparing different methods (DIF being the difference value between the results of STset and LTset).
Fig 17.
Biometric results of different methods on different temporal resolutions.
Fig 18.
Biometric results of different methods on different spatial accuracies.
Fig 19.
DET curves for the score fusion method of these four features.
Fig 20.
CMC curves for the score fusion method of these four features.
Table 8.
Score-level fusion results of different eye movement biometric methods.