EERLoss: A Novel Loss Function for Training Deep Biometric Models. A Case Study in Keystroke Dynamics

Deep learning approaches to biometric verification are commonly trained by optimizing indirect objectives, creating a misalignment between the optimization process and the primary evaluation metric, typically the Equal Error Rate (EER). This paper introduces EERLoss: a subdifferentiable, arbitrarily accurate approximation to EER for training deep biometric models. Furthermore, this framework has the potential to be adapted to optimize any specific operating point on the DET curve, enhancing its generalizability. To validate this approach, EERLoss is evaluated on a particularly demanding behavioral biometric modality: keystroke dynamics verification. This task is characterized by its high intra-class and low inter-class variability. Experiments are conducted on the large-scale KVC-onGoing benchmark, incorporating data from over 185,000 subjects across different scenarios. A comprehensive ablation study initially demonstrates the superiority of EERLoss in comparison to existing state-of-the-art loss functions. It also converges substantially faster compared to other losses, reducing the overall training cost. Additionally, a comparison is made between the proposed loss and the KVC-winning architecture by re-training it with EERLoss, demonstrating that the proposed approach significantly outperforms the original SoTA, achieving a relative EER reduction of up to approx. 30\%. This improvement on a challenging, large-scale benchmark validates the effectiveness of EERLoss as a task-aligned training objective specifically suited for high-variance biometric traits.

Beyond ROC-AUC: Operating-Point Performance Reporting for Biometric Verification

A biometric verifier is often deployed with a strict false match budget, so only a narrow, low false match rate (FMR) slice of the score range is used. A reporting standard for this setting already exists. ISO/IEC 19795-1 asks for error rates at stated operating points, for the detection error tradeoff (DET) curve as the view of the trade-off between FMR and the false non-match rate (FNMR), and for an interval of uncertainty on every value. In practice, a single area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC), the equal error rate (EER), or a verification accuracy is still reported as the resolution, which is a threshold-independent summary that the standard does not endorse. The full ROC-AUC averages the true match rate (TMR) with equal weight over the whole FMR range from 0 to 1, so almost all of its weight is placed where the system is never operated; low-FMR behavior can then be hidden, and the order of two systems can even be reversed. The guideline is revisited in this paper and tested against seven pretrained matchers across four modalities, face, voice, iris, and fingerprint, each reported with bootstrap confidence intervals and paired bootstrap tests. A system that looks stronger on full ROC-AUC is shown to be significantly worse at FMR = 10^-3. For face, a higher full AUC was obtained by FaceNet, whereas a higher TMR at FMR = 10^-3 was obtained by ArcFace, and both gaps were significant with non-overlapping intervals. Hence, the DET curve and the FNMR at a fixed FMR are re-iterated in this paper as the primary report, with ROC-AUC and EER retained as supplementary context.