UPDATES ON CLPEX.com
Updated the Fingerprint Interest Group web page with FIG #
30
Inserted KEPT (Keeping Examiners Prepared for Testimony) #4 - Verification -
Why is it done? Discuss this topic on CLPEX.com - a discussion has
been created for KEPT.
_________________________________________
we caught up on the December IAI update.
In 2008, the IAI Update will appear in the IAI's new bi-monthly newsletter,
Identification News. This newsletter will contain other association
information so that the main content of the Journal of Forensic
Identification can remain professional articles. IAI members will
received both the JFI and Identification News, so if you are not an IAI
member and wish to join, speak with an existing IAI member in your area to
sponsor you for membership.
we look at the Committee to
Define an Extended Fingerprint Feature Set, or "CDEFFS". Portions of
the document are represented here via the Detail to give the reader the
background information and a general idea of the content of the document.
Interested readers are encouraged to access the complete document available
online from the NIST website at the link below and offer feedback if
inclined to do so.
_________________________________________
The ANSI/NIST Committee to Define an Extended Fingerprint Feature Set (CDEFFS)
http://fingerprint.nist.gov/standard/cdeffs/index.html
(http://fingerprint.nist.gov/standard/cdeffs/index.html)
Last updated 18 January 2008
The purpose of CDEFFS is to define a quantifiable, repeatable, and clear
method of characterizing the information content of a fingerprint or other
friction ridge image.
CDEFFS is a committee tasked to define fingerprint features beyond minutiae,
to be added to the ANSI/NIST ITL-1 2007 standard "Data Format for the
Interchange of Fingerprint, Facial, & Scar Mark & Tattoo (SMT) Information".
The ANSI/NIST ITL standards are the basis for the FBI's EFTS/EBTS and
Interpol's INT-I, among others.
Background:
At the ANSI/NIST ITL 1-2000 Standard Workshop I in April 2005, SWGFAST
(Scientific Working Group on Friction Ridge Analysis, Study, and Technology)
was tasked to identify, define and provide guidance on additional
fingerprint features beyond the traditional ending ridges and bifurcations
currently defined in the ANSI/NIST ITL-2000 standard (which is the basis for
the FBI's EFTS, and Interpol's INT-I).
At their Fall 2005 meeting, SWGFAST drafted a memo to Mike McCabe at NIST in
response, enumerating the features used by expert human latent examiners
that are not currently addressed in fingerprint feature standards.
As a follow-on to this, at the ANSI/NIST ITL 1-2000 Standard Workshop II in
December 2005, Steve Meagher (FBI) and Austin Hicklin (Mitretek) gave a
presentation entitled “Extended Fingerprint Feature Set”, and proposed these
next steps:
1)
Convene a committee to define an Extended Fingerprint Feature Set
2)
Plan for an Addendum to the ANSI/NIST ITL-2007
3)
FBI will be providing data sets with marked up examples (similar to NIST
SD27)
In response, the Workshop then chartered this committee. The committee
currently includes representatives from various Federal Agencies, SWGFAST
and the latent fingerprint community, and senior engineers from each of the
major AFIS vendors.
American National Standard for Information Systems —
WORKING DRAFT Version 0.2
Data Format for the Interchange of Extended Fingerprint and Palmprint
Features
An Addendum to ANSI/NIST-ITL 1-2007 Data Format for the Interchange of
Fingerprint, Facial, & Other Biometric Information
18 January 2008
Abstract:
The purpose of this document is to define a quantifiable,
repeatable, and clear method of characterizing the information content of a
fingerprint or other friction ridge image. This working draft addendum to
the ANSI/NIST-ITL 1-2007 standard, “Data Format for the Interchange of
Fingerprint, Facial, & Other Biometric Information” defines a series of
updated fields for that standard, creating a broader, more complete, and
more detailed set of friction skin features than any other fingerprint
features standard. Uses may include, but are not limited to, fully automated
searches of fingerprint or palmprint systems, human-initiated searches of
automated fingerprint or palmprint systems, information exchange between
human examiners, or definitions of information content of fingerprints or
palmprints. This document is the result of more than two years of detailed
interactions among the members of CDEFFS (the ANSI/NIST Committee to Define
an Extended Fingerprint Feature Set).
Foreword:
(This informational foreword is not part of the American National Standard
ANSI/NIST ITL 1a-200X.)
At the ANSI/NIST ITL 1-2000 Standard Workshop I in April 2005, the
Scientific Working Group on Friction Ridge Analysis, Study, and Technology (SWGFAST)
was tasked to identify, define and provide guidance on additional
fingerprint features beyond the traditional ending ridges and bifurcations
currently defined in the ANSI/NIST ITL-2000 standard (which is the basis for
the FBI's EFTS, and Interpol's INT-I). SWGFAST drafted a memo to NIST in
response1, enumerating the features used by expert human latent examiners
that are not currently addressed in fingerprint feature standards. SWGFAST
stated its concern: “AFIS [Automated Fingerprint Identification System]
technology, since its onset, has utilized a very limited amount of
fingerprint detail. Latent print experts must rely on far more information
in effecting individualizations/exclusions than just ending ridges and
bifurcations, i.e., the Type-9 minutiae record. SWGFAST is attempting to
educate and provide to the vendor community the additional features and how
they are utilized by these experts.”
In response to SWGFAST, Steve Meagher (FBI) and Austin Hicklin (Mitretek,
later renamed Noblis) gave a presentation at the ANSI/NIST ITL 1-2000
Standard Workshop II in December 2005, entitled “Extended Fingerprint
Feature Set”, and proposed that a committee be convened to define an
Extended Fingerprint Feature Set as an Addendum to the next ANSI/NIST ITL
standard. The ANSI/NIST Committee to Define an Extended Fingerprint Feature
Set (CDEFFS) was chartered for that purpose. The committee includes
representatives from various Federal Agencies, SWGFAST and the latent
fingerprint community, and engineers from a variety of AFIS vendors.
This addendum to the standard is the result of agreements reached among the
members of CDEFFS during workshops held in April, May, and July 2006, and
extensive electronic interactions and document reviews from December 2005
through December 2007.
Suggestions for the improvement of this standard are welcome. They should be
sent to the attention of Austin Hicklin (CDEFFS Chair), Noblis, 3150
Fairview Park Drive South, Falls Church VA 22042,
hicklin@noblis.org.
The following individuals were members of CDEFFS and worked on defining this
standard. Inclusion in this list does not necessarily imply that the
affiliated organizations concur with the submittal of the proposed standard
to ANSI. Members who changed affiliations are listed with all affiliations.
Behnam Bavarian (Motorola/ABC)
Vincent Bouatou (Sagem Morpho)
John Burt (NEC)
Christophe Champod (University of Lausanne)
Yi Chen (Michigan State University)
Vladimir Dvornychenko (NIST)
Jeri Eaton (King County WA/Eaton Group)
Brian Finegold (BAE)
Jean-Christophe Fondeur (Sagem Morpho)
Mike Garris (NIST)
Ed German
Mike Gilchrist (FBI-CJIS)
Paul Griffin
Masanori Hara (NEC)
Austin Hicklin, Chair and Editor (Noblis)
Peter Higgins (HHB Group)
Tom Hopper (FBI-CJIS)
Anil Jain (Michigan State University)
Creed Jones (Sagem Morpho)
Artour Karaguiozian (Motorola)
Peter Komarinski (IAI)
Debbie Leben (US Secret Service)
Bill Long (TBS)
Davide Maltoni (University of Bologna)
Dana Marohn (IBG)
Brian Martin (L-1 Identity Solutions)
Mike McCabe (NIST/IDTP)
Glen McNeil (Sagem Morpho)
Steve Meagher (FBI-LPU/retired)
Dmitry Mikhailov (Jobin Yvon/SPEX)
Elaine Newton (NIST)
Afzel Noore (West Virginia University)
Shahram Orandi (NIST)
Geppy Parziale (TBS/Cogent)
Wade Petroka (King County WA Sheriff's Office)
Ann Punter (Cogent)
Richa Singh (West Virginia University)
Greg Soltis (DEA/FBI Lab)
John Mayer-Splain (Noblis)
Scott Swann (FBI-CJIS)
Elham Tabassi (NIST)
Cedric Thuillier (Sagem Morpho)
Anne Wang (Cogent)
Phillip Wasserman (NIST)
Kasey Wertheim (NGIC/Harding)
Brian Wong (IBG)
Stephen Wood (NIST)
1 Introduction
The Data Format for the Interchange of Fingerprint, Facial, & Other
Biometric Information (ANSI/NIST-ITL 1-2007) is the most recent revision of
a series of standards that began in 1983. These ANSI/NIST standards have
been extensively used as the primary method of communicating biometric
information for law enforcement and other large-scale identification
purposes.
In the 2005 ANSI/NIST workshops, various participants noted that the
fingerprint feature definitions in the ANSI/NIST standards (and extended by
the FBI’s Electronic Fingerprint Transmission Specification (EFTS)) are
oversimplifications of the more extensive set of features used by human
fingerprint experts.
Use of the feature definitions in ANSI/NIST Type-9 records limits the
performance of automated fingerprint matching systems, and limits the value
of ANSI/NIST files as a format for communication between human fingerprint
examiners. In response, the ANSI/NIST Committee to Define an Extended
Fingerprint Feature Set (CDEFFS) was chartered, consisting of
representatives from various Federal Agencies, SWGFAST and the latent
fingerprint community, and engineers from a variety of AFIS vendors. This
addendum is the result of more than a year of detailed interactions among
the members of CDEFFS. This is an addendum to the ANSI/NIST-ITL 1-2007
standard. This addendum defines a series of updated fields for the Type-9
record that includes a broader, more complete, and more detailed set of
friction skin features than any other fingerprint features standard.
2.1 Scope
This addendum defines the content, format, and units of measurement for the
exchange of friction ridge feature information that may be used in the
identification of a subject based on fingerprint or palmprint image
information. This information is intended for interchange between criminal
justice administrations or organizations that use fingerprints or palmprints
for identification purposes.
2.2 Purpose
The purpose of this addendum is to define a quantifiable, repeatable, and
clear method of characterizing the information content of a fingerprint or
other friction ridge image.
This addendum defines a broader and more complete set of friction ridge
features than has previously been defined in the ANSI/NIST standards or any
other fingerprint standard. The features defined in this addendum are used
to define the information content or features of latent or exemplar images
from fingerprints, palmprints, or other friction ridge skin.
Uses may include, but are not limited to, fully automated searches of
fingerprint or palmprint systems, human-initiated searches of automated
fingerprint or palmprint systems, information exchange between human
examiners, or definitions of information content of fingerprints or
palmprints. Note that different uses will require different subsets of the
features defined in this addendum. It should also be noted that automated
algorithms can use the extended features defined for a latent search without
explicitly computing them for the exemplar image, and thus it must be
emphasized that automated extraction of the extended features on the
exemplar is not necessarily the only nor the best way to use this
information.
Content Outline:
7 Guidance in the Definition of Extended Friction Ridge
Features
7.1 Region of Interest
7.2 Orientation
7.3 Comparison Features
7.4 Skeletonized Image
7.5 Virtual Features
8 Extended friction ridge feature set fields
8.1 Notes on Representations
8.1.1 Coordinate system
8.1.2 Angles
8.1.3 Polygons
8.1.4 Unknown, omitted, or non-applicable values
8.2 Extended friction ridge feature set fields
8.2.1 ANSI/NIST Legacy Fields
8.2.2 Location and Orientation Fields
8.2.3 Overall Image Characteristics
8.2.4 Reference Points
8.2.5 Minutiae
8.2.6 Secondary Features
8.2.7 Annotations
8.2.8 Corresponding Features
8.2.9 Skeletonized Image
8.3 Additional extended friction ridge feature set records
Figures
Figure A - 1: Fingerprint image with Region of Interest
rectangle and polygon
Figure A - 2: Examples of areas and points of correspondence
in rolled exemplar, latent, and plain
exemplar images
Figure A - 3: Examples of fingerprint, skeletonized
representation, and overlay of original / skeleton /
quality map
Figure A - 4: Example of interrelationships between minutiae
represented in a skeletonized image
Figure A - 5: Measurement of angles
Figure A - 6: Example of orientation: -25 ± 20 degrees
Figure A - 7: Palm and finger segment positions
Figure A - 8: Use of bounding boxes to mark multiple finger
segments
Figure A - 9: Placement of the core at the focus of the
innermost recurving ridgeline
Figure A - 10: Examples of core locations for a double loop
whorl, plain whorl, tented arch, and central
pocket loop whorl
Figure A - 11: Uppermost point of the ridge with greatest
curvature. Measurements are angles (degrees)
Figure A - 12: Overall fingerprint focal point
Figure A - 13: Locations of major flexion creases
Figure A - 14: Examples of the use of IDC references in
Areas of Correspondence for more than 2
images
Tables
Table A - 1: Logical record types
Table A - 2: Registered feature blocks
Table A - 3: Record layout for extended friction ridge
feature fields
Table A - 4: Finger and palm impression types
Table A - 5: Position codes for friction ridge skin
Table A - 6: Finger segment positions
Table A - 7: Pattern classification codes
Table A - 8: Local ridge quality codes
Table A - 9: Ridge quality map data representation format
options
Table A - 10: Ridge flow map data representation format
options
Table A - 11: Negative image codes
Table A - 12: Degree of distortion codes
Table A - 13: Number of cores and deltas by pattern class
Table A - 14: Methods of determining center point of
reference locations
Table A - 15: Types of distinctive features
Table A - 16: Minutia types
Table A - 17: Minutiae ridge count algorithms
Table A - 18: Major flexion creases
Table A - 19: Methods of feature detection
Table A - 20: Skeletonized image format codes
_________________________________________
KEPT -
Keeping Examiners Prepared for Testimony - #4
by Michele Triplett, King County
Sheriff's Office
Question – Verification – Why is it done?:
Why is your work verified?
Possible Answers:
a)
It’s our office policy.
b)
It’s required as a part of the ACE-V methodology.
c)
SWGFAST recommends verifying all individualizations and my office
follows this recommendation.
d)
Leaving all conclusions open for review is a standard scientific
control measure to insure the best possible results. Instead of just
leaving conclusions open for review our office takes the additional step of
reviewing all individualizations.
e)
Leaving all conclusions open for review is a standard scientific
control measure to insure the best possible results. Instead of just
leaving conclusions open for review our office takes the additional step of
reviewing all conclusions prior to reporting any conclusions.
Discussion:
Answer a: “It’s our office policy” is never a
good answer. People should know why policies exist and be able to
communicate the reasons to other people.
Answer b: This is a true statement but it
doesn’t say why a verification is done.
Answer c: Following the recommendation of
others without knowing why is never a good quality assurance measure.
Answers d and e: Either of these answers are
good (whichever applies to your agency).
Disclaimer: The intent
of this is to provide thought provoking discussion. No claims of accuracy
exist.
_________________________________________
Feel free to pass The Detail along to other
examiners. This is a free newsletter FOR latent print examiners, BY
latent print examiners.
With the exception of weeks such as this week, there
are no copyrights on The Detail content. As always, the website is
open for all to visit!
If you have not yet signed up to receive the
Weekly Detail in YOUR e-mail inbox, go ahead and
join the list now so you don't miss out! (To join this free e-mail
newsletter, enter your name and e-mail address on the following page:
http://www.clpex.com/Subscribe.htm
You will be sent a Confirmation e-mail... just click on the link in that
e-mail, or paste it into an Internet Explorer address bar, and you are
signed up!) If you have problems receiving the Detail from a work
e-mail address, there have been past issues with department e-mail filters
considering the Detail as potential unsolicited e-mail. Try
subscribing from a home e-mail address or contact your IT department to
allow e-mails from Topica. Members may unsubscribe at any time.
If you have difficulties with the sign-up process or have been inadvertently
removed from the list, e-mail me personally at
kaseywertheim@aol.com and I will try
to work things out.
Until next Monday morning, don't work too hard or too little.
Have a GREAT week!