HU225399B1 - Method of analysis and comparison of dermatoglyphic patterns - Google Patents

Abstract

The subject of the invention relates to a procedure for the analysis and comparison of dermatoglyphic patterns during which basic symbol groups are created that include geometric characteristics from the information-carrying elements of the master patterns of various persons, e.g. minutiae points, and from the sum total of the individual basic symbol groups a comparison set is made, then from the information-carrying details of the pattern to be examined an examined symbol group is made that contains geometric characteristics equivalent to the geometric characteristics determined for the information-carrying elements of the master patterns, following this with the help of a comparison device the examined symbol group of the comparison set, and the result of the analysisi is put inot a ranking order, an order of degree of relationship.nalysis is put into a ranking order, an order of degree of relationship.

Description

The scope of the description is 8 pages (including 1 page figure)

Create setpoint groups (10, 20, 30), group the setpoint groups (10, 20, 30) according to the same primary geometric feature into prime-separated subsets (101i), and then into each of the prime-separated subsets (101i) grouped setpoint sets (10, 20, 30) having the same primary geometric characteristics, grouped by secondary geometry, to form secondary separated subsets (102i) by repeating the same geometric feature set (10, 20, 30k) as the same number of geometric features are formed by the addressing code (C1, C2, C3), and the reference set (100) is provided by these unique addressing codes (C1, C2), each of which is grouped with the same geometric characteristics (10Xi). , C3 ), then, during the analysis, first determine the information carrier details of the design to be examined (4) in a manner known per se, and then, from the information carrier details, also examine the known pairs of elements (VEP1, VEP2, VEP3). Based on the test mask, VEP1, VEP2, VEP3) generate test groups (41,42,43) containing the geometric characteristics of the given pair of elements (VEP1, VPE2, VPE3) and test codes (41, 42, 43) from the test groups (41a, 42a, 43a), and then comparing the matching address codes (C1, C2, C3, C2, C3) and the unique address codes (C1, C2, C3) of the reference set (100) with the comparison tool. C3) is defined, and finally the full separation is identified by the selected address codes (C1, C2, C3) tt sets subsets (10, 20, 30) of reference set groups (10, 20, 30a) in a subset (1 OXi) to produce a result list.

The present invention relates to a method for analyzing and comparing dermatoglyphic drawings by generating reference sets containing geometric features of information carriers, such as minute points, of master drawings of 25 different persons, and generating a reference set from each set of reference drawings. In the case of mastery drawings, an investigated signal group with the same geometric characteristics is created, then the investigated signal group of the examined design is compared with the reference set groups of the reference set by means of 35 comparison tools. order.

At the crime scene, law enforcement agencies record many traces, including fingerprints and palms, as experience has shown that some of them come from the perpetrator or perpetrators.

Several solutions for fingerprinting and palmprinting have become known, the simplest of which is the examination of on-the-spot traces and prints taken from previously captured criminals. However, manual checking requires a great deal of practice and expertise and is slow.

To speed up the evaluation of dermatoglyphic designs, computer tools have recently been used. The essence of such procedures is to store fingerprints and fingerprints taken from captured criminals as master drawings in a file containing a significant amount of data for a computing device, and compare the pattern to be compared with this previously stored data. In most cases, the basis for comparison is the relative position of the so-called "minute points". Such assays are known from, inter alia, those described in U.S. Patent No. 4,896,363, EP 343,580.

Patent application HU 212 147 relates to a process whereby previously stored master drawings and traces recorded at the scene of a crime are compared in several steps and the likelihood results are ultimately compiled from a list of similarities.

Another comparative process is also the subject of WO 01/06445. The essence of this is to assign geometric features such as bearing, distance, and other data to each minute point of the dermatoglyphic drawings, and then make comparisons step by step based on these data.

The disadvantage of the known solutions, however, is that the individual comparison of the minus points of the trail and the minus points of the master drawings, even with the use of high-capacity devices, is detrimental to the rapid identification of the offender.

It is also a disadvantage that in the course of the investigation several results are generated which only match for one pair of minute points, but not for the other point points examined. And filtering out these consumes additional time and energy, essentially without actual results.

In summary, the general mistake of known comparative techniques is that the time spent on testing is long and the probability of finding is often below the desired level.

Thus, the object of the present invention was to overcome the shortcomings of the known procedures and to provide a variant which could significantly shorten the duration of the study and also provide a higher level of certainty of the result than conventional methods.

HU 225 399 Β1

The inventive idea was based on the recognition that the use of geometric information used to characterize minute points as a structuring factor in the construction of the underlying database and the use of these features to create a multi-nested data network makes this task feasible.

In accordance with the object of the present invention, the method of analyzing and comparing dermatoglyphic drawings comprises generating reference sets containing geometric features of information carrier elements, e.g. we create a test signal group with the same geometry characteristics for the information carrier elements, then we compare the investigated signal group of the examined design with the reference set groups of the reference set, and we rank the result of the analysis based on the principle of making fish. the assigning an identifier code to each of the associated dermatoglyphic drawings and mapping the reference set groups to an identifier, determining the amount and type of geometric features, and then selecting a pair of elements from the information carrier elements of the master drawing, creating the setpoint sets, grouping the setpoint sets according to the same primary geometric feature, and then separating the setpoint sets having the same primary geometric features into each primary separated subset by cyclically separating the second set of features, repeating the same number of setpoints of the same set of geometric symbols forming a fully separated subset having a number of symbols, each of the fully separated subsets having the same geometric characteristics grouped together is provided with an address code, and the reference set is composed of the sum of these unique address codes, and the analysis is first defined in a manner known per se. then, from the information carrier details, select pairs of items that are also known in the known manner, then, by evaluating each item paired according to the test mask, we create test groups containing the geometric characteristics of the given pair of items, and generate test codes from the examined signal groups. and comparing the unique address codes of the reference set sequentially with the matching address determining code codes; and finally, comparing the identification codes of the setpoint sets in the fully separated subsets identified by the selected address codes, to produce a result list.

A further feature of the process of the present invention may be that three or more geometric features are used in the preparation of the test mask, and that the primary geometric feature is a directional feature, the secondary geometric feature a distance feature, and a tertiary geometric feature a position feature.

In a preferred embodiment of the method, defining a directional feature used as a primary geometric feature determines the direction between the parsed information carrier element of the master drawing setpoint and an adjacent carrier carrier element and the direction of its tangent to the analyzed carrier carrier element.

In another embodiment of the invention, the distance characteristic used as the secondary geometric feature is determined by the value of the spacing between the parsed information carrier element of a master drawing reference group and an adjacent carrier medium.

In another variation of the method, the position feature used as a tertiary geometric feature is defined between the direction of the parsed information carrier element of the master drawing setpoint and an adjacent information carrier element, and their tangent to the adjacent carrier element value of the design of the adjacent carrier element.

The most important advantage of the method according to the invention is that it allows comparing the various dermatoglyphic drawings recorded at the scene of events - with the help of commonly used computer tools - much faster and easier to compare with the master drawings stored in databases.

It is also an advantage that conventional geometric information comparisons, by virtue of the novel approach used in the process, essentially seek out a much easier-to-handle address code, which allows for a quick scan of the entire data set, without the need for any restrictions or exclusions. it opens up to allow for possible geometric distortions, which ultimately makes the comparison more accurate.

The advantage of the foregoing is that the accuracy of the result list resulting from the method, i.e. the probability of identification, despite the higher speed of the test, is not worse than would be expected in conventional methods.

One of the advantages is that the data files can be produced and integrated from low-capacity and possibly physically separated storage units. As a result, the system can be expanded gradually and continuously without compromising the accuracy of the procedure.

HU 225 399 Β1

As an economic advantage, it should be noted that the new process can be carried out using conventional testing and comparison equipment as well as computer networks, and therefore has very low investment costs. And a significant increase in analysis speed makes it possible to perform more checks with the same system and time. This, in turn, improves the faster identification of the offender and thus improves the likelihood of crime detection and capture.

The invention will now be described in more detail with reference to the drawing. In the drawing it is

Figure 1 is a view of the dermatoglyphic pattern of the method of the invention, a

Figure 2 is a block diagram of the structure of the process-related reference set;

Figure 3 is a view of a design to be examined.

Figure 1 is an enlarged detail of a dermatoglyphic pattern 1 corresponding to a print of the index finger of a person's hand. It can be observed that the master drawing M on the dermatoglyphic drawing contains several minute points, each of which is a pair of EPs. In this case, the labeled pair EP consists of the analyzed information carrier element IV and the neighboring information carrier element I. The particular pair of EPs has a directional characteristic 10a, a distance characteristic 10b, and a position characteristic 10c in the set of reference groups 10 as defining geometric features.

In this variant of the method, the directional characteristic 10a is defined by the orientation angle connecting v between the analyzed information carrier element IV and the adjacent information carrier element I and the year tangent of the pattern r bearing the analyzed information carrier element IV.

The distance characteristic 10b is the direction v between the analyzed information carrier IV and the adjacent information carrier I, as the length of the section is the dividing distance o. The position characteristic 10c is the direction β between the analyzed information carrier IV and the adjacent information carrier I and the tangent β of the pattern r bearing the adjacent information carrier I to the adjacent information carrier I.

Each pair of EPs has a set of setpoints 30, 30 setpoints, which are essentially the basis of the process, each containing a directional characteristic 10a, a distance characteristic 10b, and a position characteristic 10c having the same content as set point setpoint 10.

Figure 2 is a schematic representation of the structure of the reference set 100 to be used in the method. It will be appreciated that each of the dermatoglyphic designs 1, the dermatoglyphic designs 2 and the dermatoglyphic designs 3 each have an identification code 1a, an identification code 2a and an identification code 3a containing essentially the identity of the person providing the dermatoglyphic pattern 1, 2, 3. The same ID code 1a is assigned to setpoint set 10 and setpoint set 20 for dermatoglyphic pattern 1, while setpoint group 30 is assigned to identifier code 2a to identify dermatoglyphic design 2. For the sake of simplicity, reference will now be made below to the design and construction of the reference set 100 using only setpoint set 10, setpoint set 20 and setpoint set 30.

It can be seen that the setpoint set 10 containing the directional characteristic 10a, the distance characteristic 10b and the position characteristic 10c, the setpoint group 20 containing the directional characteristic 20a, the distance characteristic 20b and the position characteristic 20c, the first characteristic characteristic 30b, a subset is grouped based on the primary geometric characteristic of setpoint set 10, setpoint setpoint 20, and setpoint setpoint 30, i.e., directional characteristic values of 10a, 20a and 30a. In the secondary decoupled subset 1021, the groups of the distance geometry 10b, 20b and 30b on the secondary geometric characteristics, while in the 10Xi completely separated subset, the grouping according to the tertiary geometry, i.e. the position characteristics 10c, 20c and 30c, in a fully separated subset, only setpoint sets whose primary, secondary, and tertiary geometries are the same, respectively, are included.

Each of the 10Xi fully separated subsets containing such setpoint sets receives an address code C1, C2, and C3, which represents the geometric characteristics of the set of 10, 20, or 30 setpoint sets within that 10Xi fully separated subset. The sum of these addressing code C1, addressing code C2 and addressing code C3 form the reference set 100, which can thus be considered as an addressing list.

Figure 3 shows the pattern 4 to be examined, which is a trace recorded at a crime scene. In the 4 designs to be examined, the VEP1 test item, the VEP2 test item, and the VEP3 test item can be grouped, of which VEP1 test item has 41 test signal groups identified, VEP2 test item 42 is identified by test code 42a, and VEP3 the test item has 43 test signal groups identified by the test code 43a. The test signal group 41, the test signal group 42 and the test signal group 43 have the values of the same primary, secondary and tertiary geometry characteristics as described in Figure 1. Test code 41a, test code 42a, and test code 43 correspond, in structure and form, to the address codes C1, C2, and C3, which make up the reference set 100.

The invention will now be described by way of example only.

Example 1

In the process of the present invention, the first set of reference 100s was created as follows.

HU 225 399 Β1

In each of the available dermatoglyphic drawings 1, 2, 3, respectively, the analyzed information carrier elements IV were incorporated and paired with an adjacent information carrier element I to form EP pairs. We then determined which test mask to use in subsequent comparative studies. In this process example, the test mask is composed of primary, secondary, and tertiary geometric features, wherein the primary geometric feature is an EP element pair 10a, the secondary geometric feature is a EP element pair 10b, and the tertiary geometric feature is EP element pair 10c. After assembling the test mask to be used, all geometric characteristics of each pair of EPs were determined, resulting in setpoint sets 10, 20, and 30 with directional characteristic 10a, 20a, 30a, distance characteristic 10b, 20b, 30b, and 10c, 20c, respectively. and position characteristic 30c.

Next, each set of setpoints 10, 20, 30 and the associated dermatoglyphic drawings on which they are based are assigned the identification codes 1a, 2a and 3a, respectively, to create a mapping of each fingerprint of a particular person. The setpoint sets for all EP pairs of trained dermatoglyphic designs were associated with the same ID code 1a or 2a or 3a assigned to that person.

Subsequently, setpoint set 10, setpoint set 20 and setpoint set 30 have first their primary geometric feature, i.e., 10a, 20a and 30a directional characteristic, then their secondary geometric feature, i.e. 10b, 20b and 30b distance feature, and finally their tertiary geometric feature, 10c, 20c and It was grouped by position feature 30c and, using this selection, was subdivided into 10Xi fully separated subsets. In this process example, this meant that a set of setpoints 10 containing the directional feature 10a, the distance feature 10b, and the position feature 10c, as well as other reference set groups having the same direction feature, distance feature and position feature were included in each fully separated subset. This means that all setpoints for which, for example, the directional characteristic of the analyzed information carrier element has a directional angle of 21 °, the distance characteristic of the analyzed information carrier element 4 has a distance angle of 4 °, and the angle of reference β , they are housed in the same 10Xi completely separated subset, regardless of which ID code they were assigned to.

Based on the complete sorting corresponding to the test mask, address code C1, address code C2, address code C3, identically assigned to address code C3, are finally assigned to address codes C3, we built it.

After generating the reference set 100, when the task was to identify 4 patterns to be examined, minute points were assigned to each of the 4 patterns to be examined, from which the subject pairs VEP1, VEP2, and VEP3 were selected, and each VEP1, VEP2 and VEP3, the geometric characteristics of the test mask were determined.

After determining the geometric characteristics, the test signal group 41, the test signal group 42 and the test signal group 43 were formed, to which test code 41a, test code 42a and test code 43a were assigned respectively.

Test codes 41a, 42a and 43a have the same structure as address codes C1, C2 and C3, so that during the test, the comparator device, which was preferably a high-performance and high-speed computer - essentially test codes 41a, 42a, 43a and C1 , C2, and C3 were compared. In the case where the test code 42a was identical to the address code C3, each set of set points 10,20, 30 of the fully separated subset 10Xi of the code C3 was selected and the identification codes 1a, 2a, 3a assigned to the set of set points 10, 20, 30 were retrieved. and we made a list of them. For each result, we created a list, which was then compared with each other. During the comparison, we examined which identification codes 1a, 2a, 3a are included in most lists. Lastly, by placing the person belonging to the highest numbering ID code in the first place, we have produced a list of results which lists in descending order of frequency those persons which can be assigned to a selected ID code 1a, 2a, 3a.

Example 2

The procedure described in the previous example was followed except that only the first ten persons were recruited on the basis of a suitable restriction on the result list.

Example 3

The procedure described in Example 1 was followed except that the comparison device was instructed not to compare only the matching C1, C2, C3 address codes when comparing test codes 41a, 42a, 43a with address codes C1, C2, C3. address codes, but also those that deviate to a certain extent from test codes 41a, 42a, 43a. The result list was compiled as a result of operations on this expanded set.

The method of the present invention is well suited for analyzing, comparing and identifying dermatoglyphic patterns, particularly for crime detection and possible culprit identification, but also for other applications such as access and identification systems.

Claims (5)

PATENT CLAIMS 1. A method for analyzing and comparing dermatoglyphic drawings comprising generating reference sets containing geometric features of information carrier elements, e.g. a research set of the same geometry is created, then the research set of the pattern to be examined is compared with reference set groups of the reference set by comparing, and the result of the analysis is ranked by generating a comparative set (100) of each contiguous dermatoglyph. for designs (1, 2, 3) assigning an identification code (1a, 2a, 3a), and assigning the reference set groups (10, 20, 30) to an identification code (1a, 2a, 3a), and determining an amount and type of geometric feature to form a test mask, and after that, from the information carrier elements (IV, I) of the master drawing (M), we select element pairs (EP) which, based on the test mask, are used to create setpoint sets (10, 20, 30), setpoint sets (10, 20, 30). ), grouped according to the same primary geometric feature, the primary disjoint subsets (101i), and then the second set of disjoint groups (10, 20, 30) grouped by each of the primary disjoint subsets (101i) with the same primary geometric characteristics, ), this separation cycle equals the number of geometric features repeating numerically to form fully separated subsets (10Xi) of the set of setpoints (10, 20, 30) having the same geometric characteristics, each of the fully separated subsets (10X1) having the same geometric characteristics is assigned an address code (C1, C2, C3), and comparing the reference set (100) from the sum of these unique addressing codes (C1, C2, C3), then determining the information carrier details of the pattern to be examined (4) in a manner known per se, and then examining pairs of information carrier information VEP1, VEP2, VEP3) are selected, and then each pair of tested items (VEP1, VEP2, VEP3) is evaluated on the basis of the test mask with test groups of signals containing geometric features belonging to the given item pair (VEP1, VPE2, VPE3). a) create the investigated signal groups and generating test codes (41a, 42a, 43a) from the test code (41, 42, 43a) and then using the comparator means the test codes (41a, 42a, 43a) and the unique address codes (C1, C2, C3) of the reference set (100). comparing the matching address codes (C1, C2, C3), and finally identifying the reference codes (1a, 2a, 2a) in the fully separated subsets (10Xi) identified by the selected address codes (C1, C2, C3). 3a) Comparing a list of results. Method according to claim 1, characterized in that the test mask is prepared by using three or more geometric features, the primary geometric feature being a directional characteristic (10a, 20a, 30a), and the secondary geometric feature a distance characteristic (10b, 20b, 30b), and a position characteristic (10c, 20c, 30c) is given as a tertiary geometric feature. Method according to Claim 2, characterized in that the directional characteristic (10a) used as the primary geometric characteristic (10a) is a direction (v) connecting the parsed information carrier element (IV) belonging to the reference set group (10) of the master drawing (M) and an adjacent information carrier element (I). ) and the directional angle (a) between the tangent (r) of the pattern (r) of the analyzed information carrier (IV) and the analyzed carrier (IV). Method according to claim 2 or 3, characterized in that the distance characteristic (10b) used as the secondary geometric feature is an analyzed information carrier element (IV) belonging to a reference set (10) of the master drawing (M) and an adjacent information carrier element (I). is determined from the value of the pitch (o). 5. Method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, characterized in that the position feature (10c) used as a tertiary geometric feature is an analyzed information carrier (IV) belonging to a reference set (10) of the master drawing (M) and a direction (v) of an adjacent carrier. is determined from the value of the direction angle (β) between the tangent (r) of the pattern (I) of the information carrier (I) and the adjacent information carrier (I).