Dataset Information

Why Temporal Persistence of Biometric Features, as Assessed by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, Is So Valuable for Classification Performance.

ABSTRACT: It is generally accepted that relatively more permanent (i.e., more temporally persistent) traits are more valuable for biometric performance than less permanent traits. Although this finding is intuitive, there is no current work identifying exactly where in the biometric analysis temporal persistence makes a difference. In this paper, we answer this question. In a recent report, we introduced the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) as an index of temporal persistence for such features. Here, we present a novel approach using synthetic features to study which aspects of a biometric identification study are influenced by the temporal persistence of features. What we show is that using more temporally persistent features produces effects on the similarity score distributions that explain why this quality is so key to biometric performance. The results identified with the synthetic data are largely reinforced by an analysis of two datasets, one based on eye-movements and one based on gait. There was one difference between the synthetic and real data, related to the intercorrelation of features in real data. Removing these intercorrelations for real datasets with a decorrelation step produced results which were very similar to that obtained with synthetic features.

SUBMITTER: Friedman L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7472145 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Why Temporal Persistence of Biometric Features, as Assessed by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, Is So Valuable for Classification Performance.

Friedman Lee L Stern Hal S HS Price Larry R LR Komogortsev Oleg V OV

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) 20200814 16

It is generally accepted that relatively more permanent (i.e., more temporally persistent) traits are more valuable for biometric performance than less permanent traits. Although this finding is intuitive, there is no current work identifying exactly where in the biometric analysis temporal persistence makes a difference. In this paper, we answer this question. In a recent report, we introduced the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) as an index of temporal persistence for such features. He ...[more]

PMID: 32823860

Similar Datasets

Project description:Intraclass correlation (ICC) is a reliability metric that gauges similarity when, for example, entities are measured under similar, or even the same, well-controlled conditions, which in MRI applications include runs/sessions, twins, parent/child, scanners, sites, and so on. The popular definitions and interpretations of ICC are usually framed statistically under the conventional ANOVA platform. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of ICC analysis in its prior usage in neuroimaging, and we show that the standard ANOVA framework is often limited, rigid, and inflexible in modeling capabilities. These intrinsic limitations motivate several improvements. Specifically, we start with the conventional ICC model under the ANOVA platform, and extend it along two dimensions: first, fixing the failure in ICC estimation when negative values occur under degenerative circumstance, and second, incorporating precision information of effect estimates into the ICC model. These endeavors lead to four modeling strategies: linear mixed-effects (LME), regularized mixed-effects (RME), multilevel mixed-effects (MME), and regularized multilevel mixed-effects (RMME). Compared to ANOVA, each of these four models directly provides estimates for fixed effects and their statistical significances, in addition to the ICC estimate. These new modeling approaches can also accommodate missing data and fixed effects for confounding variables. More importantly, we show that the MME and RMME approaches offer more accurate characterization and decomposition among the variance components, leading to more robust ICC computation. Based on these theoretical considerations and model performance comparisons with a real experimental dataset, we offer the following general-purpose recommendations. First, ICC estimation through MME or RMME is preferable when precision information (i.e., weights that more accurately allocate the variances in the data) is available for the effect estimate; when precision information is unavailable, ICC estimation through LME or the RME is the preferred option. Second, even though the absolute agreement version, ICC(2,1), is presently more popular in the field, the consistency version, ICC(3,1), is a practical and informative choice for whole-brain ICC analysis that achieves a well-balanced compromise when all potential fixed effects are accounted for. Third, approaches for clear, meaningful, and useful result reporting in ICC analysis are discussed. All models, ICC formulations, and related statistical testing methods have been implemented in an open source program 3dICC, which is publicly available as part of the AFNI suite. Even though our work here focuses on the whole-brain level, the modeling strategy and recommendations can be equivalently applied to other situations such as voxel, region, and network levels.

Project description:BACKGROUND: In multicenter studies, center-specific variations in measurements may arise for various reasons, such as low interrater reliability, differences in equipment, deviations from the protocol, sociocultural characteristics, and differences in patient populations due to e.g. local referral patterns. The aim of this research is to derive measures for the degree of clustering. We present a method to detect heavily clustered variables and to identify physicians with outlying measurements. METHODS: We use regression models with fixed effects to account for patient case-mix and a random cluster intercept to study clustering by physicians. We propose to use the residual intraclass correlation (RICC), the proportion of residual variance that is situated at the cluster level, to detect variables that are influenced by clustering. An RICC of 0 indicates that the variance in the measurements is not due to variation between clusters. We further suggest, where appropriate, to evaluate RICC in combination with R2, the proportion of variance that is explained by the fixed effects. Variables with a high R2 may have benefits that outweigh the disadvantages of clustering in terms of statistical analysis. We apply the proposed methods to a dataset collected for the development of models for ovarian tumor diagnosis. We study the variability in 18 tumor characteristics collected through ultrasound examination, 4 patient characteristics, and the serum marker CA-125 measured by 40 physicians on 2407 patients. RESULTS: The RICC showed large variation between variables: from 2.2% for age to 25.1% for the amount of fluid in the pouch of Douglas. Seven variables had an RICC above 15%, indicating that a considerable part of the variance is due to systematic differences at the physician level, rather than random differences at the patient level. Accounting for differences in ultrasound machine quality reduced the RICC for a number of blood flow measurements. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that the degree of data clustering is addressed during the monitoring and analysis of multicenter studies. The RICC is a useful tool that expresses the degree of clustering as a percentage. Specific applications are data quality monitoring and variable screening prior to the development of a prediction model.

Dataset Information

Why Temporal Persistence of Biometric Features, as Assessed by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, Is So Valuable for Classification Performance.

Publications

Why Temporal Persistence of Biometric Features, as Assessed by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, Is So Valuable for Classification Performance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets