arXiv:2608.08521cs.CVcs.AI2026-08

提出统一框架同时检测人脸欺骗与伪装,提升系统鲁棒性。

A Combined Feature-Based Framework for Disguise and Spoofing Detection in Face Recognition Systems

  • 用五种特征融合方法统一处理欺骗与伪装问题
  • HOG方法在多种条件下表现最稳定,欺骗检测达91.67%
  • 揭示传统特征在防伪与抗伪装间的性能权衡

人脸识别系统常面临两类独立的失效模式:欺骗攻击(如用照片或视频冒充用户)和伪装导致的误拒(如佩戴饰品、胡须、光照或姿态变化使合法用户被拒)。本文提出并比较了五种融合特征提取与分类的流程,涵盖PM(PCA+最小欧氏距离)、LPM(局部二值模式+PCA+MED)、HPM(方向梯度直方图+PCA+MED)、SM(加速稳健特征+MED)和HM(哈里斯角点+MED),均采用预处理、特征提取、滤波、分类的两阶段流程。模型在来自FEI、Disguised Faces Database和NUAA数据库的115名受试者上训练,评估覆盖混合外观、正面、暗光、左右转头及照片欺骗等六种测试场景。结果显示,基于HOG的HPM管道在各类条件中表现最稳定,混合外观伪装识别准确率达94.59%,姿态与光照变化下准确率为81.5%-93.2%,欺骗检测达91.67%;而基于LBP的LPM在欺骗检测中仅次于PM(96.67%),但对姿态变化的鲁棒性较弱。结果表明经典特征表示在欺骗敏感性与伪装鲁棒性间存在可量化的权衡,为后续深度学习与跨数据库扩展提供依据。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Face recognition systems face two distinct, commonly-separated failure modes: spoofing, where an impostor presents a photograph or video of an authorized user, and disguise, where a legitimate user is rejected because their appearance differs from their enrolled template due to accessories, facial hair, illumination, or pose. This paper proposes and compares five combined feature-extraction and classification pipelines that address both problems within a single framework: PM (PCA and Minimum Euclidean Distance, MED), LPM (Local Binary Patterns with PCA and MED), HPM (Histogram of Oriented Gradients with PCA and MED), SM (Speeded-Up Robust Features with MED), and HM (Harris corner features with MED). Each pipeline follows a common two-phase process comprising pre-processing, feature extraction, feature filtering, and classification. The methods were trained on 115 subjects drawn from the FEI, Disguised Faces Database, and NUAA databases and evaluated on six test conditions covering mixed appearances, frontal faces, dark illumination, left- and right-turned poses, and photo-spoofing attempts. The HOG-based pipeline (HPM) achieved the most consistent performance across conditions, with 94.59% accuracy on mixed-appearance disguise, 81.5-93.2% across pose and illumination variants, and 91.67% on spoofing, while the LBP-based pipeline (LPM) achieved the second-highest spoofing-detection accuracy (93.2%), behind PM (96.67%), but weaker robustness to pose change. These results reveal a measurable trade-off between spoof sensitivity and disguise robustness among classical feature representations, motivating the deep-learning and cross-database extensions discussed in the concluding sections.

人脸识别欺骗检测伪装识别特征融合

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。