Help with science fair!!!

[scidude]

For my science fair project, I am doing it on "is the iris imprint more reliable than the fingerprint?"

 

But I don't know how to do an experiment to find out that answer. Please could someone help me???

[IMAMONKEY!]

For my science fair project, I am doing it on "is the iris imprint more reliable than the fingerprint?"

 

But I don't know how to do an experiment to find out that answer. Please could someone help me???

 

lol. i would imagine this is a bit advanced for a science fair. But if you want my opinion, drop it. I dont think youre going to be able to afford an iris scanning device or thhumbprint scanner anytime soon lol. I know i couldnt, but maybe im just poor.;)

 

IMAMONKEY!

 

P.S. it is an interesting topic though. if you have the dough, go for it.

[InfiniteNow]

Hello Scidude,

 

Welcome to Hypography. That's in intersting topic of consideration for a science fair. I'm not all too well versed in the research on identification, but you might try the following as a starting place:

 

http://biometrics.cse.msu.edu/fingerprint.html

 

http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jhw/bioauth/andre/IrisscantechSep01.pdf

 

Tested to positively identify users in an office environment iris recognition technology registered a false match rate of zero in 2,735,529 comparisons and a 0.0 percent failure-to-acquire rate. Iris recognition had a false rejection rate of 0.0188, the lowest of all systems rested. Four of the other biometrics systems registered a false rejection rate of 10-25 percent. Only retina scanning comes close to the accuracy rate of iris recognition.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometrics

 

 

 

Good luck on the project. Hopefully you'll share some of your own knowledge and insights with the rest of us.

 

 

Cheers. :surprise:

[Michaelangelica]

I wonder if an irridologist would be able to help you?

An irridologist is an alternative medical practitioner who diagnoses disease by looking at peoples iris. They usually have close up cameras for taking photos of eyes. they certainly know a lot about the iris. get hold of the local phonebook and ring one up.

 

Apparently fingerprinting is not 100% accurate as CSI would have us believe

SEE:

1.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/moments/s1579301.htm

"So why do I have a problem with the idea that fingerprint identification is infallible?

 

The first reason is that it has never been proved that all fingerprints are different - it has just been claimed, over and over again, always without proof. By comparison, it was plainly stated that all snowflakes are different, until the scientist Nancy Kerry found two identical snowflakes in a Wisconsin snowstorm in 1988."

 

2. 13/5/01 10 am 1

 

Summary: ... Show Slide These are the left index fingerprints that two nine-year-old identical twin girls. ... As you can see the fingerprints are quite different from one another. ... Consequently, because they have identical genes that means the programme generating fingerprints reached different conclusions either 1 as a consequence of environmental cues that were different, or 2 as a consequence of ... http://www.abc.net.au/rn/deakin/docs/hood.doc - 40k - [ doc ] - Cached - 26 Apr 2006

 

Maybe their is a crime lab in your local police dept. and someone you can talk too.

 

NOW

having got all that info how do you design an experiment that shows the difference?

MMMmm hard one

Are there any identical twins in your neighbourhood?

Could you get the police dept to test their fingerprints and the irridologist to test their eyes?

What would that prove?

Well in any experiment you just have to have a

(usually null but don't wory about that) hypothesis like

"The twins iris and fingerprints will be the same" or not

Then do your experiment and see.

 

Of course scientists would test hundreds of people to test a theory and then stistically analyse it. But hey! you've made a start and you can always criticise your own experiment. That always got me brownie points with my professors!

 

Anyway do some reseach on the net and with local experts and write back if you are still stuck.

Good luck

Michael:)

[UncleAl]

The latest greatest glaucoma medications are prostaglandin mimics: Xalatan (latanoprost), Travatan (travoprost), Lumigan (bimatoprost). They typically intensify iris pigmentation over 6-18 months of administration, only leaving blue eyes unaffected.

 

http://www.agingeye.net/glaucoma/glaucomadrugtreatment.php

 

Glaucoma incidence is expected to substantially increase,

 

http://jech.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/58/12/1021

 

How do those two facts taken together affect your proposal?

[Michaelangelica]

The latest greatest glaucoma medications are prostaglandin mimics: Xalatan (latanoprost),

Hi

Interesting

I have "pigment dispersal glaucoma". I am not sure what that means but I gather that one bit of my eye rubs up against another and dislodges little bits of pigment. These get lodged in the little drainage hole that controls ocular pressure and pressure goes up. Therefore glaucoma.

I take Xalatan and Timopt and have done for years

Recently my eye doc. drilled little laser holes in the back of my eye. He says this has stopped the rubbing and should help relieve the pressure.

So are you saying that

1. taking the drugs

2. the laser surgery

would change my retinal image on a retinal scanner and I may now not be admitted to work (CIA HQ)!?

m

--

Michael

[UncleAl]

So are you saying that

1. taking the drugs

2. the laser surgery

would change my retinal image on a retinal scanner

Nothing here involves the retina. Iris imaging might be affected. Are you pseudophakic? If you had cataract extraction and IOL implantation, did your ophthalmologist do a competent job with in-the-bag placement or did he crap out with a haptic ending up in the sulcus? A haptic in the sulcus can abut part of the IOL against the rear of the iris, progressively abrading off pigment granules. (The results of this surgical error could be minimized for about $1-5/IOL with PVP surface grafting of the plastic by default. The FDA will not tolerate such an improvement.)

 

Aqueous is secreted behind the iris. It flows through the pupil and is reabsorbed in the angle, where the clear cornea meets the white sclera. It permeates through the trabecular mesh and flows though the canals of Schlemm.

 

If you plug the trabecular mesh with debris you've got problems. Decreasing aqueous secretion and increasing angle drainage is standard drug treatment. Physical occulsion of the trabecular mesh is now diddled with laser trabeculotomy - drilling microholes in the mesh to restore drainage through the physical clog. This will not alter images of the eye.

[scidude]

Uncle Al, i dont understand anything about the glaucoma thing.

Michael, is you're reading this, does it neccesarily have to be identical twins because i dont know any identical twins but i have a not-identical twins in my class. would that do?

Anyway thanks for helping me.

[Michaelangelica]

Sci dude

Dont worry about the Glaucoma posts they are not relevant.

 

You ask a very hard question

I would suggest you have a talk to your teacher about it.

 

If I was designing an experiment to test your hypothesis

I would want to iris test and fingerprint a lot of people (100-10,000)

I would then want experts to identify the people in my experiment by fingerprints and iris I would then see what (if any) error rate there is.

I would then need to test this with special sttistical "significance" tests to see if ther was really a significant difference.

 

You obviosly can't do this.

I will keep thinking about the next best thing.

 

In the meantime do some reseach so you can show you teacher you are trying.

Talk to experts in the field and make some notes of your discussions and

Look up relevant web sites and print or make notes of these to show your teacher. Highlight the bits (you print out) that you think most relevant. (See the links I suggested above)