English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Template update allows to modify the biometric reference of a user while heuses the biometric system. With such kind of mechanism we expect the biometricsystem uses always an up to date representation of the user, by capturing hisintra-class (temporary or permanent) variability. Although several studiesexist in the literature, there is no commonly adopted evaluation scheme. Thisdoes not ease the comparison of the different systems of the literature. Inthis paper, we show that using different evaluation procedures can lead indifferent, and contradictory, interpretations of the results. We use akeystroke dynamics (which is a modality suffering of template ageing quickly)template update system on a dataset consisting of height different sessions toillustrate this point. Even if we do not answer to this problematic, it showsthat it is necessary to normalize the template update evaluation procedures.

Performance Evaluation of Biometric Template Update