Investigating Gender Bias in Touch Biometrics
Behavioral biometrics offer a promising approach for continuous authentication, but their fairness across demographic groups remains largely unexplored. This paper investigates gender bias in swipe-based authentication using the BBMAS (117 users) and ANTAL (71 users) datasets and evaluates XGBoost and DenseNet classifiers through False Acceptance Rate (FAR) and False Rejection Rate (FRR). XGBoost achieved authentication accuracies of 92% and 94% on the BBMAS and ANTAL datasets, respectively, whi
Record details
Published: 9 June 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Finance, VC & PE
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Neutrality Bites: Gender Representation in AI-Generated Animal Stories
arXiv · 6 June 2026
PeerCheck: Enhancing LLM-Generated Academic Reviews Towards Human-Level Quality
arXiv · 18 June 2026
Beyond Independent Manipulation: Individual Fairness-aware Strategic Classification with Peer Imitation
arXiv · 30 May 2026
Demystifying the Optimal Fair Classifier in Multi-Class Classification
arXiv · 30 May 2026
Resume Screening, Fast and Slow: (Biased) AI Recommendations' Influence on Human Decision Making
arXiv · 20 June 2026
OccuReward: LLM-Guided Occupant-Centric Reward Shaping for Demographic Equity in Grid-Interactive Buildings
arXiv · 27 May 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (9 June 2026), “Investigating Gender Bias in Touch Biometrics,” evidence record 1175, https://ethics.ai/record/1175 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.