Communications: electrical – Selective – Intelligence comparison for controlling
Reexamination Certificate
2001-01-16
2003-01-07
Zimmerman, Brian (Department: 2635)
Communications: electrical
Selective
Intelligence comparison for controlling
C382S115000, C348S152000, C348S156000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06504470
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to automated systems for permitting authorized persons to access secured buildings or other areas while preventing such access by unauthorized persons. More particularly, the invention relates to an access control system which identifies authorized persons and permits access by the authorized person and their approved guests while permitting monitoring and recording of access.
2. Description of the Related Art
The invention relates to controlling access into a restricted area and thus the term “access”, as used herein, refers to physical entry into a building, or other restricted area, such as a room, a locker, a cabinet, or the like. However, the restricted area can be the exterior of a building or the like and thus the invention can be applied to controlling entry into or exit out of a building or other area. There have always been situations in which it was desirable to restrict access to certain physical areas to a select person or group of people. Such restricted access has been accomplished by fences, walls, locks and other barriers. However, even the use of barriers has not prevented unauthorized access. Accordingly, it has been necessary in many instances to provide human surveillance in the form of a security guard or receptionist at an entrance to an area or through the use of video cameras or the like to transmit images to persons at a remote or centralized location. Of course, the use of personnel and video cameras can become expensive and is only as reliable as the personnel and their state of alertness at any particular time.
The complexities of modem society have only served to increase the need for access control. For example, many government agencies and contractors work on matters that are of a confidential or even “top secret” nature. In fact, most workplaces, such as offices, warehouses, and even retail stores in some instances, have a need to implement access control to prevent the theft of intellectual property and/or goods. Further, “members only” establishments, such as health clubs, country clubs, and the like, may derive revenue from membership fees and thus must restrict access to current members and approved guests. Of course, the use of personnel to monitor access adds significant financial overhead. However, particularly in members only establishments, the costs of monitoring personnel must be balanced with the loss of revenue due to access by non members or non approved guests. Therefore, many members only establishments have an employee stationed at the entrance during all hours of operation. The salary, benefits, and other costs associated with such an extra employees are significant.
Many members only establishments issue identification cards to their members, employees and other authorized personnel. Often, the identification card includes a picture of the authorized person. However, such an identification card still requires a security guard or other personnel for verification. Also, such cards are easily forged by replacing the picture with that of an unauthorized person. To overcome these limitations, it is known to provide the authorized person with a personal identification number (PIN) or other identifying code. The identifying code can be encoded in a magnetic strip or the like in a security card and read by an automated reader at an entrance to grant access only to persons having the card. Alternatively, the code can be entered by the user on a keypad to gain access. However, the use of identifying-codes also drawbacks in access control applications. In particular, the identification card can be stolen or the user can be forced under duress to reveal their code. In such cases, unauthorized possessors of the card or code can gain access to a restricted area.
The use of biometrics has been proposed as a solution to the limitations noted above. Generally, the term “biometrics” refers to the study of measurable biological characteristics, i.e. biometric parameters, of a living being. In the context of security, “biometrics” refers to techniques that rely on a unique, measurable characteristic of a living being for automatically recognizing or verifying identity. Examples of biometric parameters are facial data, retinal data, fingerprint data, speech data, and the like.
Generally, biometric systems operate in the following manner. First, a system captures a sample of at least one biometric parameter of an authorized person during an “enrollment” process. The parameters are then converted by the system into a mathematical code, i.e., data, that is stored as the biometric template representing measured biometric parameters for that person. Central to a biometric system is the “engine” which processes the biometric data in accordance with various algorithms or other processing mechanisms.
Some biometric systems use “identification” methods and some use “verification” methods. In identification systems, a sample is presented to the biometric system and the system then attempts to find out who the sample belongs to by comparing the sample with a plurality of templates obtained through enrollment. Verification systems on the other hand perform a one-to-one process where the biometric system is seeking to verify identity. A single biometric sample is matched against a single template obtained during enrollment. If the two match, the system effectively confirms that the person actually is who he presents himself to be. The key difference between these two approaches centers on the logic addressed by the biometric system and how these fit within a given application. Identification systems decide who the person is and can check whether more than one matching biometric template exists. Accordingly, identification systems can deny access to an individual who is attempting to pass himself off with more than one identity. Verification, on the other hand only decides if the person is who he says he is. Accordingly, identification systems are more versatile and powerful. However, verification systems generally require less processing horsepower and thus are commonly used.
In typical biometric access control systems, biometric sensors are placed proximate entrances and are linked to a central computer having the engine and biometric “enrollment” data, i.e., templates, representing biometric parameters of authorized users collected from a central enrollment station. If the biometric parameter collected at the entrance matches a template stored in the central computer, access is granted. However, conventional biometric systems have several limitations. In particular, the sensing accuracy of certain biometric parameters, such as facial parameters, retinal parameters, and the like can be highly dependent on the environment in which the parameters are sensed. For example, the lighting intensity, angle and color will affect sensing of biometric parameters. Accordingly, the ability to reliably match data representing parameters collected at an entrance with data of templates collected during enrollment is limited, especially when the entrance is an external entrance where the weather, season, and time of day will affect lighting significantly. Also, sensing biometric parameters, converting the parameters to data, communicating the data to a central computer, and comparing the data parameters with templates of enrollment data in the central computer is relatively time consuming, even with high speed computers and communication links. Accordingly, such systems present significant inconveniences to the authorized persons through improperly rejected access and time delays prior to granting access. Further, the use of a centralized computer for storing enrollment data also renders each entrance dependent on the central computer.
The use of less environmentally affected biometric parameters, such as fingerprint parameters can alleviate some of the problems noted above. However, sensing such parameters requires that the person desiring access make physical contact with a sensor, such as a finge
Puchek Daniel R.
Tumey David M.
Xu Tianning
Kaufman Marc S.
Nextgenid, Ltd.
Nixon & Peabody LLP
Zimmerman Brian
LandOfFree
Access control method and apparatus for members and guests does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Access control method and apparatus for members and guests, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Access control method and apparatus for members and guests will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3013451