## A Prior Embedding-Driven Architecture for Long Distance Blind Iris Recognition Qi Xiong 1,2

- 1, International College, Hunan University of Arts and Sciences, Changde 415000, China Xinman Zhang 2,*
- 2, School of Automation Science and Engineering, Faculty of Electronic and Information Engineering; MOE Key Lab for Intelligent Networks and Network Security, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, Shaanxi, China

## Jun Shen 3

- 3, School of Computing and Information Technology, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Abstract: Blind iris images, which result from unknown degradation during the process of  iris  recognition  at  long  distances,  often  lead  to  decreased  iris  recognition  rates. Currently, little  existing  literature  offers  a  solution  to  this  problem.  In  response,  we propose a prior embedding-driven architecture for long distance blind iris recognition. We  first  proposed  a  blind  iris  image  restoration  network  called  Iris-PPRGAN.  To effectively  restore  the  texture  of  the  blind  iris,  Iris-PPRGAN  includes  a  Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) used as a Prior Decoder, and a DNN used as the encoder. To extract iris features more efficiently, we then proposed a robust iris classifier by modifying  the  bottleneck  module  of  InsightFace,  which  called  Insight-Iris. A  lowquality blind iris image is first restored by Iris-PPRGAN, then the restored iris image undergoes recognition via Insight-Iris. Experimental results on the public CASIA-Irisdistance dataset demonstrate that our proposed method significantly superior results to state-of-the-art  blind  iris  restoration  methods  both  quantitatively  and  qualitatively, Specifically, the recognition rate for long-distance blind iris images reaches 90% after processing  with  our  methods,  representing  an  improvement  of  approximately  ten percentage points compared to images without restoration.

Keywords: Blind Iris Images, Iris Recognition, Image  Restoration, Generative Adversarial Network (GAN), Super-Resolution

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

This  research  was  funded  by  Hunan  University  of Arts  and  Science  Research Project （ NO. 23ZZ07 ）

*Corresponding author: Xinman Zhang

## 1 、 Introduction ：

As biometric technology becomes increasingly prevalent in security authentication, iris recognition has gained considerable attention for its unique features and resistance to  forgery  [1,2].  However,  in  certain  challenging  environments,  such  as  when  iris images are captured from a distance in uncontrolled settings, various factors-such as low resolution, blur, and noise, or combinations of these issues-often cause significant degradation in image quality, as shown in Figure 1.

From Figure 1(a), it is evident that the iris image captured at a distance of three meters using specialized equipment has very clear textures, making it suitable for iris classification and recognition. However, in Figure 1(b), due to the influence of certain environmental factors, the captured iris image is very blurry, making the iris textures difficult  to  recognition.  This  situation  will  severely  affect  the  accuracy  of  iris recognition [3,4].

Current  hardware  devices  are  often  constrained  by  cost  and  technological limitations,  making  it  challenging  to  achieve  satisfactory  recognition  results  for degraded iris images. Consequently, enhancing algorithms to improve iris recognition rates has become a prominent research focus. Among these enhancement methods, iris image restoration algorithms are particularly noteworthy. Their objective is to convert low-quality, low-resolution iris images into high-quality, high-resolution ones, thereby increasing the robustness of iris recognition systems.

Figure 1(a) High-quality iris image

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-cb617614-98f6-454f-b03a-ce6ecb264fe1.jpg)

Figure 1(b) Degraded iris image

Figure 1: Comparison of High-Quality and Degraded Iris Images

In recent years, deep neural networks (DNNs) have shown exceptional performance across various computer vision tasks [5-8]. Numerous image restoration methods based on DNNs have been developed, demonstrating superior performance compared to traditional techniques [9-11].

The SRCNN algorithm utilized convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for image super-resolution, learning the mapping relationship between low-resolution and highresolution images directly through these networks, thus achieving end-to-end super- resolution reconstruction [12,13]. This algorithm is noted for its simple structure and high  training  efficiency.  However,  due  to  the  CNN's  inherent  limitation  of  local perception, it struggles to recover fine image  details, resulting in suboptimal reconstruction quality.

With the rapid advancement of Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) [14,15]. A several  methods  have  recently  emerged  for  reconstructing  iris  images  from  lowresolution inputs. The SRGAN algorithm utilizes the GAN framework and introduces a perceptual loss function that accounts for human visual perception [16]. This approach not only excels in PSNR metrics but also produces visual effects that align with human perception, effectively restoring image details. Building on this, ESRGAN replaces the simple  residual blocks in SRGAN  with  Residual  Dense  Blocks  (RDB).  This modification  allows  ESRGAN  to  achieve  superior  visual  effects  in  image  superresolution  tasks,  particularly  in  restoring  image  details  and  textures,  demonstrating significant improvements over SRGAN [17].

The aforementioned methods have varying degrees of success in enhancing iris image quality and recognition rates. However, these studies typically use predetermined methods to generate degraded iris images. In real-world situations, the specific causes of  iris  image  degradation  are  often  unknown.  As  a  result,  many  researchers  have introduced the concept of blind image restoration.

Blind  Image  Restoration,  or  Blind  Image  Repair,  involves  restoring  damaged images without prior knowledge of the cause or extent of the damage [18]. Due to the unique characteristics and position of the iris, blind iris image restoration remains a challenging research problem.

This paper's research approach employs a GAN to enhance low-quality blind iris images,  transforming  them  into  high-quality  iris  images.  Once  the  image  quality  is restored,  the  high-quality  iris  images  are  input  into  a  pre-trained  iris  classifier  for recognition. This classifier uses a CNN structure, which excels at accurately extracting and classifying iris features. This end-to-end design not only enhances the usability of low-quality iris images but also improves the overall robustness and accuracy of the iris recognition system.

In this paper, we leverage the strengths of CNNs and GANs to propose a novel solution  for  recognizing  long-distance,  low-quality  blind  iris  images.  The  main contributions of this paper are as follows:

- (1) We proposed a network named Iris-PPRGAN for blind iris image restoration. Specifically, Iris-PPRGAN incorporates a GAN-based prior network as the decoder and

a DNN as the encoder to effectively restore the texture of the blind iris.

- (2). To effectively extract iris features and further enhance the robustness of iris recognition, we propose an iris classifier named Insight-Iris. This network is used not only for iris recognition tasks but also in Iris-PPRGAN to ensure that the generated iris remains consistent with the original iris in terms of identity characteristics.
- (3)  Our  method  sets  new  state-of-the-art  in  blind  iris  recognition.  It  has  the capability to tackle low-quality iris images caused by various factors.

## 2 Related Works

- 2.1 Iris recognition. Iris recognition technology distinguishes individuals by using algorithms to model the unique textures of their irises. Daugman was the first to propose a  successful  commercial  iris  recognition  system  [19].  This  system  uses  calculus operators to detect the inner and outer boundaries of the iris, and 2D Gabor filters to extract  iris  features.  Recognition  is  then  performed  by  calculating  the  Hamming distance. While Daugman's method shows excellent performance with ideal iris images, its recognition rate diminishes significantly with non-ideal images. Since then, many researchers have proposed improved methods [20-22]. However, these enhancements are still primarily based on ideal iris images, limiting their effectiveness in real-world scenarios.

In  recent  years,  the  rapid  development  of  deep  learning  technology  has  led  to significant progress in iris recognition. Deep learning models can automatically extract features, enhancing the accuracy and robustness of iris recognition systems. Nguyen et al. [23] were among the first to investigate the performance of pre-trained CNNs in iris recognition. They discovered that although these CNNs were initially trained to classify general  objects,  they  were  also  effective  in  representing  iris  images.  This  approach successfully extracted discriminative visual features and achieved satisfactory recognition results on two iris datasets. Minaee et al. [24] explored the application of deep features extracted from VGG-Net for iris recognition. Their method was tested on two well-known iris databases and demonstrated satisfactory results. Luo et al. [25] designed a deep learning model incorporating spatial attention and channel attention mechanisms. These mechanisms were directly integrated into the feature extraction module,  enabling  the  model  to  efficiently  learn  the  most  important  features  while suppressing  unnecessary  ones.  Hafner  et  al.  [26]  adapted  the  Daugman-defined  iris recognition pipeline by using the DenseNet-201 convolutional neural network as the feature extractor. This adaptation achieved a recognition accuracy of 97.3%.

The  iris  features  extracted  through  deep  learning  are  often  utilized  in  iris classification networks. Gangwar et al. [27] proposed two backbone networks for iris recognition: DeepIrisNet-A and DeepIrisNet-B. DeepIrisNet-A is based on standard convolutional  layers,  while  DeepIrisNet-B  incorporates  multiple  Inception  layers within its neural network architecture. Experimental results indicate that both networks are effective and robust in iris recognition tasks.

Given the similarities  between  iris  recognition  and  general  image  classification tasks, various backbone network architectures have been adopted for iris recognition. For  example,  Zhao  et  al.  utilized  a  capsule  network  based  on  the  InceptionV3 architecture  [28],  while  Hsiao  et  al.  [29]  employed  EfficientNet  as  their  backbone network.

2.2 Iris Image Restoration. We reviewed all literature on iris image enhancement from the past five years. The techniques discussed in these papers can be categorized into three types: traditional algorithms, CNN-based methods, and GAN-based methods. Traditional  algorithms  encompass  methods  that  do  not  utilize  deep  learning.  For instance, Liu M et al. [30] used a fuzzy filter on the region outside the iris boundary to reduce interference, allowing deep learning models to better focus on the iris features. While this method improved the recognition rate, it did not fundamentally enhance lowquality iris images. Additionally, papers [4] and [31] enhanced the CLAHE algorithm from different perspectives, essentially using interpolation methods.

Papers [12] and [32] explore the use of CNN to achieve super-resolution in iris images. Paper [12] focuses on evaluating different CNN architectures, highlighting the importance of maintaining texture details to generate more realistic images. In contrast, Paper  [32]  investigates  various  CNN  architectures  and  also  examines  how  image reprojection can enhance the accuracy of iris recognition systems. Furthermore, Paper [13] introduces an efficient iris image super-resolution network (ESISR). This network significantly reduces computational costs by minimizing the number of parameters and employing a sharpness-based loss function, all while maintaining image quality. This makes ESISR particularly suitable for mobile device applications.

Paper  [33]  proposes  a  method  that  utilizes  a  densely  connected  convolutional network  as  the  generator.  This  approach  combines  adversarial  learning  with  an identification  loss  function  for  joint  training,  thereby  enhancing  both  the  superresolution quality and the recognition capability of iris images. Building on this, Paper [34] introduces the ocular super-resolution network (OSRCycleGAN), which is based on a cycle-consistent generative adversarial network (CycleGAN). This method aims to achieve super-resolution reconstruction from low-resolution ocular images.

Paper [35] introduces a super-resolution method based on GANs known as DDASRGAN. This method employs a dual-dimensional attention mechanism to automatically identify important regions of interest (ROIs) in the image and enhance the detailed features of these regions.

## 2.3 Blind Image Restoration Techniques

The  aforementioned  literature  primarily  addresses  non-blind  image  restoration. Currently, there is no research specifically focused on blind iris restoration. However, several techniques have been developed for blind face restoration, including HiFaceGAN [36], PSFR-GAN (Progressive Semantic-Aware Style Transformation for Blind Face Restoration) [37], PULSE (Photo Upsampling via Latent Space Exploration) [38], and GPEN (Generative Facial Prior-Embedded Network) [18], among others.

HiFaceGAN  is  a  GAN  specifically  designed  for  face  image  restoration.  Its generator  includes  multiple  sub-networks,  each  responsible  for  different  levels  of restoration tasks. PSFR-GAN progressively restores face images by utilizing semantic information and style transformation to improve the quality of restoration. PULSE is a super-resolution technique that does not directly optimize pixel-level losses. Instead, it finds  the  high-resolution  output  that  best  matches  the  low-resolution  input  through latent space exploration. GPEN is a method for face restoration and enhancement that employs a generative network embedded with facial prior knowledge. This approach effectively  addresses  various  issues  in  face  images,  such  as  blurriness,  noise,  and compression  artifacts.  This  paper  can  draw  on  the  above-mentioned  blind  face restoration techniques to achieve blind iris restoration.

This paper aims to adapt the aforementioned Iris recognition technology and blind face restoration techniques to achieve blind iris recognition. We use a GAN as a Prior Decoder  and  a  Pre-Trained  Insight-Iris  model  to  construct  a  new  blind  iris  image restoration  network.  Insight-Iris  is  a  robust  iris  classifier,  which  we  developed  by modifying the bottleneck module of InsightFace.

## 3. Proposed Method

## 3.1 System Framework

Given the unknown reasons for the degradation of blind iris images, this paper proposes to integrate a pre-trained GAN generator with an iris classifier into a single network. By freezing certain parts of the GAN network and fine-tuning the iris classifier, the  method aims to achieve end-to-end  recognition of low-quality iris images. This approach  simplifies the process and  has the potential to enhance  the  overall performance of the iris recognition system. The framework of the system is illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Overall System Framework

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-27b73f42-dd4b-4cb3-9c6f-2b9f69f5c21e.jpg)

## 3.2 Implementation of Iris Image Restoration Network

Figure 2 clearly shows that the performance of the GAN network is pivotal to the recognition rate when restoring images. The restoration of blind iris images discussed in this chapter exemplifies a classic ill-posed inverse problem. The objective of this paper is to derive a high-quality iris image, denoted as 𝑦 , from a low-quality blind iris image, denoted as x, as illustrated in Equation (1).

$$x = D ( y )$$

where D represents the degradation function (i.e., blurring, adding noise, etc.).

The primary challenge in solving the blind image restoration problem is the nonuniqueness of the solution. Many different high-quality images (y') can satisfy (x = D(y')), meaning that various high-quality iris images (y') might degrade into the same low-quality iris image (x). This is especially true when the degradation process results in the loss of critical information.

Existing methods [12,13,32] generally employ pixel-level loss functions to train DNNs for mapping 𝑥 to y. As a result, the final output tends to be an average of all high-quality iris images, often lacking detailed features and textures.

## 3.2.1 Overall Network Structure

To address the lack of detail and texture in iris images generated by the GAN network, this paper first trains a GAN prior network using StyleGAN technology, as shown in  Figure  3.  This  GAN  prior  network  is  then  embedded  into  a  DNN  as  the decoder for high-quality iris image restoration, with the DNN serving as the encoder,

## as illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 3: GAN prior network

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-f09d3431-5fa4-43b8-a187-e10be040c5bd.jpg)

Figure  4  presents  the  overall  framework  of  the  iris  image  restoration  network, which  is  divided  into  three  main  components.  The  first  component  is  a  U-shaped generator  that  includes  an  encoder  and  a  decoder.  The  second  component  is  the discriminator. The third component is responsible for loss calculation.

Figure 4 Overall framework of GAN network

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-2f859e40-67dd-4414-9b52-e5f8b97f09e7.jpg)

The low-quality blind iris image, captured from a distance, is first processed by a DNN encoder equipped with a multi-head attention mechanism. This encoder's task is to convert the input iris image into a latent code ( z ), as illustrated in Figure 3. This latent code resides in the GAN's latent space ( Z ), a high-dimensional space that represents the intrinsic features of the data. Through this mapping, the encoder captures the critical information  from  the  low-quality  iris  image  and  converts  it  into  a  more  abstract representation, which can subsequently be used to generate or reconstruct the image.

The GAN prior network then reproduces the  desired high-quality iris  image 𝑦 through G( ), where z 𝐺 is the GAN generator trained during the learning phase. This generation process performs a one-to-one mapping, greatly reducing the uncertainty inherent in the one-to-many mappings of previous methods. Although GAN inversion methods [33-35] share similar concepts with the approach proposed here, they depend on pre-trained GAN models without further adjustments, leading to inconsistent results when processing iris images. In contrast, the method proposed in this section involves carefully designing, pre-training, and fine-tuning the GAN module to effectively restore blind iris images.

To ensure that the processed images retain the individual's unique features and recognition  attributes,  the  pre-trained  iris  classifier  is  used  as  a  feature  extraction network, as shown in Figure 4. This classifier calculates the identity loss between the generated image and the original high-quality iris image. The GAN model presented in Figure 4 is named Iris-PPRGAN, which will be explained in detail in the subsequent sections.

## 3.2.2 GAN-Based Prior Network

U-Net [39] has been successfully applied to various image restoration tasks and is effective  in  preserving  image  details.  Consequently,  our  Iris-PPRGAN  adopts  a  Ushaped encoder-decoder architecture, as depicted in Figure 4. The GAN prior network is designed to meet two requirements: firstly, it must be capable of generating highdefinition  iris  images;  secondly,  it  should  be  easily  integrated  into  the  U-shaped network structure to function as a decoder.

Inspired by recent GAN architectures like StyleGAN [40,41], this paper employs a mapping network to project the latent code (z) into a less entangled space, as shown in Figure 3. The intermediate code (w) is then distributed to each GAN block. When integrating the GAN prior network into a DNN for fine-tuning, feature maps generated from each encoder layer are directly passed to corresponding decoder layers as noise inputs for the GAN blocks, as illustrated in Figure  4. This integration helps restore image details and contextual information because these feature maps carry significant spatial information from the input data. Therefore, when embedding the GAN prior network into a U-shaped DNN, it is essential to reserve enough space for these feature maps, allowing for their effective integration and utilization. This enhances the overall network performance and fine-tuning effectiveness.

The structure of the GAN blocks follows the architecture of StyleGAN v2, known for its superior ability to generate high-quality images. The number of GAN blocks matches the number of convolutional layers in the U-shaped DNN that can extract skip features, which is determined by the resolution of the input iris images.

## 3.2.3 DNN Encoder with Multi-Head Attention Mechanism

Given  that  the  input  low-quality  iris  image  has  a  size  of  256× 256× 3,  a  DNN comprising  seven  convolutional  layers  is  employed  as  the  encoder.  The  encoder extracts key features from the low-quality image to generate the input controls for the GAN, including the latent code and noise inputs. The network structure of the encoder is detailed in Table 1.

Table 1 Structure of the Encoder Network

| Layer        | Number of Filters   | Kernel Size   | Stride   | Feature Map Size   |
|--------------|---------------------|---------------|----------|--------------------|
| Input Image  | -                   | -             | -        | 256× 256× 3        |
| Conv Layer 1 | 128                 | 1×1           | 1        | 256× 256× 128      |
| Conv Layer 2 | 256                 | 3×3           | 2        | 128× 128× 256      |
| Conv Layer 3 | 512                 | 3×3           | 2        | 64× 64× 512        |
| Conv Layer 4 | 512                 | 3×3           | 2        | 32× 32× 512        |
| Conv Layer 5 | 512                 | 3×3           | 2        | 16× 16× 512        |
| Conv Layer 6 | 512                 | 3×3           | 2        | 8×8× 512           |
| Conv Layer 7 | 512                 | 3×3           | 2        | 4×4× 512           |

The design concept of the encoder is as follows:

1) Use the output of the fully connected layers (i.e., deeper features) to replace the latent code 𝑧 . These deep features encapsulate high-level abstract information extracted from the input image, which is used to govern the global structure of the generated iris image.

2) Use the shallow outputs of the encoder to replace noise inputs. These shallow features contain more local and detailed information, which manage local aspects in the generated image, such as the texture of the iris. These features significantly enhance the detail richness and realism of the generated image.

Due to the iris's unique position between the sclera and the pupil, a multi-head attention mechanism is added to the model's encoder to better focus on the iris region in the input image and ignore irrelevant areas such as the pupil and sclera. This module processes  incoming  feature  maps  to  capture  the  interactive  information  of  image features,  emphasizing  key  information  during  feature  transmission  and  effectively mitigating detail loss, as shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5 Multi-head attention module

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-38422f76-f9c1-4d08-8412-c6f8b8927d9e.jpg)

The multi-head self-attention module used in this paper is based on CNNs. This module first defines the input dimensions and the number of heads, which are crucial for the multi-head self-attention mechanism. These parameters dictate how the attention mechanism is divided into multiple "heads" for parallel processing and determine the dimensional size each head processes. The input is split into multiple parts, or "heads," each  of  which  independently  performs  the  same  attention  operation.  This  design enables the model to capture different aspects of information in various representational subspaces, thereby enhancing its learning and generalization capabilities.

In the multi-head attention module shown in Figure 5, three dedicated convolution layers process the input data to produce the corresponding Q, K, and V representations. The  output  channel  number  of  these  convolution  layers  is  the  query  dimension multiplied by the number of heads. Each convolution layer has a kernel size of 1 to maintain spatial dimensions while transforming feature dimensions.

During forward propagation, the input feature map ( F ) generates the query, key, and  value  feature  maps  through  these  three  convolution  layers,  respectively.  These feature maps are the core components of the attention mechanism and are rearranged to create  independent  feature  subspaces  for  each  head.  The  transposed  product  of  the query  and  key  is  then  calculated  to  obtain  attention  scores,  which  are  normalized through  a  softmax  layer  to  form  the  attention  map.  This  attention  map  focuses  on important information by performing matrix multiplication with the value feature map.

Finally, another convolution layer combines the multi-head outputs back to the original  feature  dimensions,  while  a  residual  connection  adds  the  input  back  to  the output to enhance the model's learning capability and gradient flow. This design allows the multi-head self-attention mechanism to improve the model's understanding of the input data while maintaining computational efficiency.

The implementation of this multi-head self-attention mechanism equips the model to handle complex image and sequence tasks effectively. It enables the model to learn richer and more discriminative feature representations across multiple subspaces, thus improving overall performance and efficiency.

After  extensive  experimental  testing,  incorporating  the  multi-head  attention mechanism  in  the  middle  part  of  the  network  yielded  the  best  results.  In  this configuration, the multi-head attention mechanism computes attention values on the downsampled feature maps, which are then weighted and integrated into these maps. The adjusted feature maps are subsequently passed to deeper network layers.

## 3.3.4 Discriminator Module and Loss Functions

The discriminator network used in the paper directly adopts the implementation of the StyleGAN2 discriminator. To fine-tune the proposed GAN model, we employ three loss functions: adversarial loss LA , L 1 smooth loss, and identity loss Lid . The adversarial loss LA is inherited from the GAN prior network.

$$L _ { _ { A } } = \min _ { _ { G } } \max _ { _ { D } } E _ { ( X ) } \log ( 1 + \exp ( - D ( G ( \tilde { X } ) ) ) )$$

Where, X and X represent the real high-definition image and the degraded lowquality image, respectively. G denotes the generator during training, and D denotes the discriminator.

Smooth L 1  Loss,  also  known  as  Huber  Loss,  is  commonly  used  in  regression problems.  It  combines L 1  and L 2  loss  to  mitigate  the  impact  of  outliers  on  model training. Smooth L 1 Loss uses the squared term for smaller errors and the absolute value for  larger  errors.  This  approach  maintains  the  robustness  of  the  loss  function  while reducing the risk of gradient explosion.

$$L 1 = \begin{cases} 0. 5 \cdot ( X - G ( \tilde { X } ) ) ^ { 2 } & \text{if $|\, X-G(\tilde{X})|<1$} \\ | \, X - G ( \tilde { X } ) \, | - 0. 5 & \text{otherwise} \end{cases}$$

where, X and X represent the real high-definition image and the degraded lowquality image, respectively. G denotes the generator during training.

Identity  loss Lid relies  on  the  dot  product  between  feature  vectors  to  measure similarity. The larger the dot product, the more similar the two are.

$$L _ { \tilde { u } d } = 1 - F ( X ) \bullet F ( G ( \tilde { X } ) )$$

Where, F represents the pre-trained iris classifier used to extract feature vectors. The final loss L is as follows:

$$L = L _ { _ { A } } + L _ { _ { 1 } } + L _ { _ { d } }$$

Smooth L 1  Loss  enhances  fine  image  details  and  preserves  original  color information. Introducing identity loss Lid helps balance the adversarial loss LA , leading to the restoration of more realistic and identity-consistent iris images.

## 3.3 Implementation of the Classifier

As illustrated in Figure 2, the classifier is a pivotal component of our system. An effective  classifier  can  better  extract  features  from  iris  images,  leading  to  higher recognition rates. Commonly used classifiers include VGG, ResNet50, and other deep CNNs. Recent advancements in deep learning have introduced even more powerful classifiers, such as the InsightFace framework used in face recognition [42].

In this paper, we introduce a classifier specifically designed for iris recognition, named  Insight-Iris,  which  is  based  on  the  InsightFace  framework.  The  structure  of Insight-Iris is detailed in Figure 6.

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-4d5057ee-b681-42c6-a22f-cb01d14427eb.jpg)

(b)Bottleneck structure. K represents the size of the convolutional kernel. S represents the stride

Figure 6: Network Structure of Insight-Iris

In Figure 6(a), the Insight-Iris consists of an input layer, bottleneck layers, and an output  layer. The  input  layer  is composed  of  a  convolutional  layer,  a  batch normalization layer, and a ReLU activation function. The model's main body comprises 50  bottleneck  modules[43].  Each  bottleneck  module,  as  detailed  in  Figure  6(b), comprises two main components: the shortcut layer and the residual layer.

The shortcut layer employs a MaxPool2d layer with a kernel size of 1 for downsampling. This step is followed by a Conv2d layer that uses a 1× 1 kernel, coupled with a BatchNorm2d layer to align the dimensions. The residual layer is composed of several sequential steps. Initially, a BatchNorm2d layer standardizes the input. This is followed by a Conv2d layer with a 3× 3 kernel that maintains the same input and output spatial dimensions. After this convolution, a BatchNorm2d layer and ReLU activation function further normalize and activate the features. Finally, another Conv2d layer with a 3× 3 kernel adjusts the spatial dimensions, and a concluding BatchNorm2d layer once again normalizes  the  output.  This  layered  structure  ensures  effective  down-sampling, normalization, and activation, necessary for robust Blind Iris Restoration.

During forward propagation, the input data flows through both the shortcut and residual  layers.  Their  outputs  are  then  combined  to  produce  the  final  output.  This approach utilizes residual learning to improve the network's ability to extract features across multiple layers, thereby enhancing its representation capabilities.

The  network's  output  layer first utilizes batch  normalization  and  dropout operations to process the output from the convolutional layers. This enhances model stability  and reduces overfitting. The multi-dimensional data is then flattened into a one-dimensional vector and passed through a fully connected layer to map the features to  classification  labels.  To  further  stabilize  the  output,  1D  batch  normalization  is applied  again.  This  sequence  effectively  transforms  deep  features  into  the  final classification result. Such a structure improves the network's training efficiency and generalization performance.

## 4 Experimental Results and Analysis

## 4.1 Experimental Dataset

In  this  experiment,  we used the CASIA-Iris-Distance dataset from the Chinese Academy of Sciences . This dataset was created with an advanced biometric sensor capable of detecting iris and facial features up to 3 meters away. The high-resolution images include both irises and facial features and comprise 142 subjects with a total of 2,567 images. Each image has a resolution of 2352× 1728 pixels. Figure 7 shows three example images from the CASIA-Iris-Distance database.

Figure 7. Example Images from the CASIA-Iris-Distance Database

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-5c9ae643-7ded-468a-b237-1c8b8df71f6f.jpg)

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-05c298a0-43c8-411e-a8c3-b65190908339.jpg)

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-49084b91-2b56-437e-aab4-9f5e00e568fe.jpg)

From  this  dataset,  we  selected  141  classes  of  images.  Of  these,  102  classes containing  a  total  of  1,748  left-eye  iris  images  were  used  to  train  the  GAN's  prior network. Corresponding low-quality iris images were then synthesized from these highquality  images  to  fine-tune  the  Iris-PPRGAN  network.  To  evaluate  the  model's performance, 80% of the remaining 39 classes, totaling 624 images, were used to train the iris classifier. The remaining 20%, or 156 images, served as the test set.

The low-quality iris  images  in  the  test  set  were  degraded  according  to  a  blind image  quality  degradation  principle,  then  processed  by  Iris-PPRGAN,  and  finally classified using the Insight-Iris classifier. To quantitatively assess the method, we used Peak  Signal-to-Noise  Ratio  (PSNR),  Frechet  Inception  Distances  (FID)  [18],  and classification accuracy as performance metrics.

Importantly, there is no overlap between the dataset used to train the GAN network and  the  test  set  used  to  evaluate  the  network's  performance.  This  ensures  that  the training and test datasets remain completely separate.

## 4.2 Training Strategy

The training of the entire network is organized into four steps:

- 1,  Pre-train  the  GAN  Prior  Network:  Select  102  classes  of  images  from  the experimental  dataset  and  pre-train  the  GAN  prior  network  following  the  training strategy of StyleGAN.
- 2, Train the Iris Classifier: Select an additional 39 classes of images to train the Insight-Iris classifier.
- 3, Fine-tune the Iris-PPRGAN Network: Embed the pre-trained GAN model into the proposed Iris-PPRGAN network and fine-tune the entire network using a set of synthesized  low-quality  (LQ)  and  high-quality  (HQ)  iris  image  pairs  (the  image synthesis process is detailed in section 4.3).
- 4, Integrate and Fine-tune: Combine the trained Iris-PPRGAN network with the trained iris classifier to create a system for long-distance low-quality iris classification. Utilize the input low-quality iris images, freeze the Iris-PPRGAN network, and finetune the iris classifier.

This structured approach ensures a cohesive and efficient training process for the entire network.

## 4.3 Implementation of Low-Quality Iris Images

Since the pre-trained GAN prior network must be embedded into Iris-PPRGAN for fine-tuning, we need to construct low-quality (LQ) to high-quality (HQ) image pairs. To achieve this, we use the following degradation model to synthesize degraded iris images from the 102 classes of high-quality (HQ) iris images.

$$I ^ { d } = ( I \otimes \mathbf k ) \downarrow _ { _ { s } } + \mathbf n _ { _ { \sigma } }$$

Where, I ， ， k  n ， I d represent the input iris image, blur kernel parameter, Gaussian noise  intensity,  and  degraded  image,  respectively. s   ， are  represented  as  2D convolution and standard s times downsampler. In the experiments, for each image, the blur kernel k is randomly selected from a set of blur models. The specific degradation parameters are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Ranges of Degradation Parameters

| Parameter Name   | Value Range                                   |           |          |
|------------------|-----------------------------------------------|-----------|----------|
|                  | Blur Kernel Type                              | ['iso' ， | 'aniso'] |
| Blur Kernel k    | Blur Kernel Type Selection Probability        | [0.5 ，   | 0.5]     |
|                  | Blur Kernel Size                              | 41        | 41       |
|                  | Gaussian Blur Kernel Standard Deviation Range | [0.1 ，   | 10]      |
|                  | Blur Kernel Type                              | [0.8 ，   | 8]       |
|                  | Blur Kernel Type Selection Probability        | [0 ，     | 20]      |

Using these degradation parameters, 1,748 facial images were degraded. Despite the degradation, these images can still be processed by the improved YOLO network to detect and segment the iris area, as shown in Figure 1(b). Examples of the degraded iris images alongside their original high-quality counterparts are presented in Figure 8.

Figure 8 illustrates that, unlike traditional image  degradation methods, the degradation model based on Formula (6) simulates the complex degradation process of blind images in uncontrolled environments. The extent of quality degradation varies among images; some exhibit only slight quality reduction, as shown in Figure 8(c), while others show significant quality deterioration, as depicted in Figure 8(d).

## 4.4 Experimental Results of the GAN Network

Fine-tuning the model with numerous severely degraded images, such as those in Figure 8, enables the DDN encoder component of the Iris-PPRGAN to learn to generate appropriate latent codes and noise. These inputs are then fed into the GAN prior decoder network, which is simultaneously updated to effectively handle severely degraded iris images in real-world scenarios.

Figure 8 Examples of Low-Quality to High-Quality Iris Image Pairs

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-3257b11f-8753-441c-8da8-af6726199236.jpg)

During the model update process, we use the Adam optimizer with a batch size of 2. Different components of the GAN  network-the encoder, decoder, and discriminator-are assigned different learning rates (LR). Specifically, the learning rate for the encoder is set to 0.0002. The learning rates for the decoder and discriminator are set to be 10 times and 100 times that of the encoder, respectively. During the testing phase,  the  discriminator  is  removed.  Figure  9  compares  the  recovery  effects  of traditional  image  restoration  algorithms  and  GAN models on the severely  degraded image shown in Figure 8(d).

(a) Blind Iris      (b) Bilinear      (c) SRCNN        (d) SRGAN (e) ESRGAN (f) Proposed Method (g)

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-158f689c-f6ee-44fb-af75-76bf596fbd17.jpg)

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-4de36328-17a3-4a80-bd28-773f12784bf4.jpg)

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-39d28319-b60f-4806-baed-b767c0bce680.jpg)

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-9739417f-12b7-4374-bbff-258ebad40dd2.jpg)

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-caa74d80-522a-4a16-9055-32ede6a81c2d.jpg)

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-92795bb3-68a5-4864-b674-4889362a7a67.jpg)

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00210v1-figure-ba505f89-423b-4723-a4cf-40cda7033cb5.jpg)

Original Image

Figure 9 Recovery Performance of Various GAN Models on Low-Quality Iris Images Figures 9(b)-(e) demonstrate that while some GAN models perform well on images degraded  in  certain  known  ways,  their  performance  on  blind  image  restoration,  as examined in this study, is inadequate. Figure 9(f) shows the recovery results of our proposed method. Although it does not fully restore the image to its original quality, it offers a significant visual improvement compared to the low-quality image in Figure

9(a). Moreover, for iris recognition, enhancing the appearance alone is insufficient; it is equally critical to improve the recognition rate.

## 4.5 Experimental Results of the Iris Classifier

The iris classifier in our method has a dual role: it enhances recognition accuracy and accurately extracts iris features to calculate the identity loss of the GAN network. Given that the input images are blind iris images similar to Figure 9(a), traditional methods that precisely locate the iris region are no longer feasible under such lowquality constraints. Therefore, we use the entire low-quality iris image as input. This approach not only simplifies computation but also enables the model to learn the global information of the iris image.

This study uses 80% of a total of 39 classes of iris images, amounting to 624 images, for  the  training  set  and  employs  transfer  learning  to  train  the  iris  classifier.  The remaining  20%,  or  156  iris  images,  are  used  as  the  test  set.  Table  3  presents  the operating  environments  for  the  different  deep  convolutional  neural  networks,  while Table 4 shows the classification recognition results. All experiments are conducted in a Windows 10 environment.

Table 3 Operating Environments for Various Classifiers

| Classifier              | Python   | PyTorch   |   Epoch |   Batch | Learning Rating   |
|-------------------------|----------|-----------|---------|---------|-------------------|
| VGG16                   | 3.7.1    | 1.8.0     |      40 |      32 | 1×10 -3           |
| MobileNetv2             | 3.7.1    | 1.8.0     |      40 |      32 | 1×10 -3           |
| Resnet50                | 3.7.1    | 1.8.0     |      40 |      32 | 1×10 -3           |
| Vision Transformer(ViT) | 3.8.17   | 1.11.0    |      40 |      32 | 1×10 -3           |
| Insight-Iris            | 3.8.17   | 1.11.0    |      20 |      16 | 1×10 -4           |

Table 4 Comparison of Recognition Rates for Various Classifiers

| Classifier   | Recognition Rate on Original High-Definition Iris Images   | Recognition Rate on Blind Iris Images   |
|--------------|------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
| VGG16        | 99.46%                                                     | 33.33%                                  |
| MobileNetv2  | 94.23                                                      | 7.05%                                   |
| Resnet50     | 95.51%                                                     | 14.10%                                  |
| ViT          | 98.08%                                                     | 35.26%                                  |
| Insight-Iris | 98.74%                                                     | 80.77%                                  |

As shown in Table 4, traditional deep convolutional networks achieve excellent recognition  rates  for  high-quality  iris  images,  with  all  exceeding  95%,  and VGG16 nearing 100%. However, their recognition rates drop significantly for blind iris images, indicating poor robustness. In contrast, although Insight-Iris also experiences a decline, it still maintains a recognition rate of 80%, demonstrating strong robustness.

## 4.6 Recognition Experiment Results for Long-Distance Blind Iris

In the experiments, we use traditional image restoration algorithms and various GAN models to replace the GAN shown in Figure 2. Using the method described in section  4.2,  low-quality  iris  images  are  generated  from  the  624  training  images mentioned in section 4.1  and  used  as  input  to  Figure  2  to  fine-tune  the  Insight-Iris classifier. Table 5 presents the performance of the long-distance iris classifier under different image restoration algorithms used in Figure 2.

Table 5 Comparison of Recognition Rates for Low-Quality Iris Images Using Different Restoration Algorithms

| Restoration Algorithm   |   PSNR |   FID | Recognition Rate   |
|-------------------------|--------|-------|--------------------|
| 无                      |  16.54 | 50.39 | 80.77%             |
| Bilinear                |  16.39 | 49.4  | 80.12%             |
| SRCNN                   |  16.37 | 49.09 | 80.12%             |
| SRGAN                   |  15.52 | 49.15 | 78..20             |
| ESRGAN                  |  16.18 | 50.31 | 74.36%             |
| Iris-PPRGAN             |  15.57 | 45.43 | 90.38%             |

This table offers a clear comparison of the recognition rates for low-quality iris images when different restoration algorithms are applied. The quality of the restored images is evaluated using PSNR and FID metrics, and the resulting recognition rates highlight the effectiveness of each restoration method.

From Table 5, we observe that although the proposed method does not excel in PSNR performance, it achieves the lowest FID value. This suggests that the images generated by Iris-PPRGAN are more similar to the original images. Furthermore, a comparison between Tables 4 and 5 reveals that traditional interpolation algorithms and conventional deep learning-based image restoration methods result in lower recognition rates than the unprocessed blind iris images. In other words, these methods introduce artifacts that not only fail to improve recognition performance but actually degrade it. Although the proposed restoration model, Iris-PPRGAN, does not reach the recognition rate of the original high-definition images, it improves the recognition rate by nearly 10%, achieving a level of 90.38%.

## 4.7 Ablation Experiments

To investigate the effectiveness of the components of the proposed model, two types of ablation experiments were designed.

(1) Effect of Different Classifiers on Recognition Rate: Various classifiers were used to replace the iris classifier shown in Figure 2, in order to test the recognition rate of blind iris images. The results are documented in Table 6.

Table 6 Effect of Different Classifiers on Recognition Rate for Blind Iris Images

| Classifier   | Recognition Rate on Blind Iris Images   | Recognition Rate on Restored Iris Images   |
|--------------|-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
| VGG16        | 36.54%                                  | 55.77%                                     |
| MobileNetv2  | 5.13%                                   | 26.28%                                     |
| Resnet50     | 7.05%                                   | 41.03%                                     |
| ViT          | 40.10%                                  | 40.38%                                     |
| Insight-Iris | 80.77%                                  | 90.38%                                     |

Table 6 shows that the recognition rate of blind iris images improves to varying degrees, regardless of which classifier is used in the system proposed in Figure 2. This demonstrates  the  strong  scalability  of  the  proposed  system.  However,  the  highest recognition  rate  is  achieved  only  with  the  Insight-Iris  network,  highlighting  the robustness of Insight-Iris.

(2) Effect of the Proposed System on Original Iris Images: Although the proposed system  is  designed  for  blind  iris  images,  the  quality  of  input  images  cannot  be determined in practical applications. To verify the robustness of BIRN, we compared the  performance  of  original,  non-degraded  iris  images  under  different  restoration algorithms. The experimental results are documented in Table 7.

Table  7  shows  that  the  restoration  algorithms  have  a  slight  impact  on  the recognition rate of original, non-degraded iris images. Unlike other restoration methods, our proposed Iris-PPRGAN not only maintains but actually improves the recognition rate of the original iris images by 0.62%. This demonstrates its strong robustness.

Table 7 Comparison of the Effect of Different Restoration Algorithms on the Original Iris Images

| Restoration Algorithm   | Recognition Rate   |
|-------------------------|--------------------|
| Bilinear                | 98.71%             |
| SRCNN                   | 98.71%             |
| SRGAN                   | 98.71%             |
| ESRGAN                  | 98.07%             |
| Iris-PPRGAN             | 99.36%             |

## 5 Conclusion

This paper introduces a prior embedding-driven architecture for the recognition of long-distance blind iris images. The system integrates two key components: a novel iris image restoration network called Iris-PPRGAN, and a new iris classifier named InsightIris.  In  developing  Iris-PPRGAN, we achieve high-quality iris image restoration by embedding a pre-trained GAN into a U-shaped deep neural network as a decoder, and fine-tuning  the  entire  GAN  network  using  low-quality  iris  images  extracted  from artificially degraded facial images. Subsequently, different low-quality iris images are fed into Iris-PPRGAN to fine-tune the iris classifier. Experimental results demonstrate that the methods we proposed can achieve a recognition rate of up to 90%, improving the recognition rate by 10% and outperforming existing techniques for low-quality iris restoration. This ensures robustness and accuracy in recognizing long-distance, lowquality blind iris images.

Acknowledgments: This research was funded by Hunan University of Arts and Science Research Project （ NO. 23ZZ07 ）

## Referenes

- [1]  Xiong  Q,  Zhang  X,  Xu  X,  et  al.  A  modified  chaotic  binary  particle  swarm optimization scheme and its application in face-iris multimodal biometric identification[J]. Electronics, 2021, 10(2): 217.
- [2] Jamaludin S, Ayob A F M, Akhbar M F A, et al. Efficient, accurate and fast pupil segmentation for pupillary boundary in iris recognition[J]. Advances in Engineering Software, 2023, 175: 103352.
- [3]  Xiong  Q,  Zhang  X, Wang  X,  et  al.  Robust  Iris-Localization Algorithm  in  NonCooperative Environments Based on the Improved YOLO v4 Model[J]. Sensors, 2022, 22(24): 9913.
- [4] Xiong Q, Zhang X, He S, et al. A fractional-order chaotic sparrow search algorithm for enhancement of long distance iris image[J]. Mathematics, 2021, 9(21): 2790.
- [5]  Guo  S,  Yan  Z,  Zhang  K,  et  al.  Toward  convolutional  blind  denoising  of  real photographs[C]//Proceedings  of  the  IEEE/CVF  conference  on  computer  vision  and

pattern recognition. 2019: 1712-1722.

- [6]  Kupyn O, Budzan V, Mykhailych M, et al. Deblurgan: Blind motion deblurring using  conditional  adversarial  networks[C]//Proceedings  of  the  IEEE  conference  on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2018: 8183-8192.
- [7] Ledig C, Theis L, Huszár F, et al. Photo-realistic single image super-resolution using a generative adversarial network[C]//Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2017: 4681-4690.
- [8]  Yu  J, Lin  Z,  Yang  J,  et al. Generative  image  inpainting  with  contextual attention[C]//Proceedings  of  the  IEEE  conference  on  computer  vision  and  pattern recognition. 2018: 5505-5514.
- [9] Dong C, Loy C C, He K, et al. Image super-resolution using deep convolutional networks[J].  IEEE  transactions  on  pattern  analysis  and  machine  intelligence,  2015, 38(2): 295-307.
- [10]  Kim  J,  Lee  J  K,  Lee  K  M. Accurate  image  super-resolution  using  very  deep convolutional networks[C]//Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2016: 1646-1654.
- [11]  Shi  W,  Caballero  J,  Huszár  F,  et  al.  Real-time  single  image  and  video  superresolution using an efficient sub-pixel convolutional neural network[C]//Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2016: 1874-1883.
- [12] Ribeiro E, Uhl A, Alonso-Fernandez F. Iris super-resolution using CNNs: is photorealism important to iris recognition?[J]. IET Biometrics, 2019, 8(1): 69-78.
- [13] Tapia J, Gomez-Barrero M, Busch C. An efficient super-resolution single image network using sharpness loss metrics for iris[C]//2020 IEEE International Workshop on Information Forensics and Security (WIFS). IEEE, 2020: 1-6.
- [14] Goodfellow I, Pouget-Abadie J, Mirza M, et al. Generative adversarial nets[J]. Advances in neural information processing systems, 2014, 27.
- [15]  Creswell A, White T,  Dumoulin V,  et  al.  Generative  adversarial  networks: An overview[J]. IEEE signal processing magazine, 2018, 35(1): 53-65.
- [16] Kashihara K. Iris recognition for biometrics based on CNN with super-resolution GAN[C]//2020 IEEE Conference on Evolving and Adaptive Intelligent Systems (EAIS). IEEE, 2020: 1-6.
- [17] Wang C, Lu T, Wu G, et al. D-ESRGAN: A Dual-Encoder GAN with Residual CNN  and  Vision  Transformer  for Iris Image  Super-Resolution[C]//2022 IEEE International Joint Conference on Biometrics (IJCB). IEEE, 2022: 1-8.
- [18] Yang T, Ren P, Xie X, et al. Gan prior embedded network for blind face restoration in  the  wild[C]//Proceedings  of  the  IEEE/CVF  Conference  on  Computer Vision  and Pattern Recognition. 2021: 672-681
- [19]    Daugman J G. High confidence visual recognition of persons by a test of statistical independence [J]. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 1993, 15(11): 1148-1161.
- [20]  Wildes R P. Iris recognition: an emerging biometric technology [J]. Proceedings of the IEEE, 1997, 85(9): 1348-1363.
- [21]    Lim S, Lee K, Byeon O, et al. Efficient iris recognition through improvement of feature vector and classifier[J]. ETRI journal, 2001, 23(2): 61-70.

[22] Masek L. Recognition of human iris patterns for biometric identification[J]. 2003.

[23]  Nguyen  K,  Fookes  C,  Ross A,  et  al.  Iris  recognition  with  off-the-shelf  CNN features: A deep learning perspective[J]. Ieee Access, 2017, 6: 18848-18855.

[24] Minaee S, Abdolrashidiy A, Wang Y. An experimental study of deep convolutional features for iris recognition[C]//2016 IEEE signal processing in medicine and biology symposium (SPMB). IEEE, 2016: 1-6.

[25] Luo Z, Li J, Zhu Y. A deep feature fusion network based on multiple attention mechanisms for joint iris-periocular biometric recognition[J]. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 2021, 28: 1060-1064.

[26]  Hafner  A,  Peer  P,  Emeršič  Ž,  et  al.  Deep  iris  feature  extraction[C]//2021 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Information and Communication (ICAIIC). IEEE, 2021: 258-262.

[27] Gangwar A, Joshi A. DeepIrisNet: Deep iris representation with applications in iris recognition and cross-sensor iris recognition[C]//2016 IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP). IEEE, 2016: 2301-2305.

[28] Zhao T, Liu Y, Huo G, et al. A deep learning iris recognition method based on capsule network architecture[J]. IEEE Access, 2019, 7: 49691-49701.

[29] Hsiao C S, Fan C P. EfficientNet based iris biometric recognition methods with pupil  positioning  by  U-net[C]//2021  3rd  International  Conference  on  Computer Communication and the Internet (ICCCI). IEEE, 2021: 1-5.

[30] Liu M, Zhou Z, Shang P, et al. Fuzzified image enhancement for deep learning in iris recognition[J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2019, 28(1): 92-99.

[31] Sree Vidya B, Chandra E. Triangular fuzzy membership-contrast limited adaptive histogram  equalization  (TFM-CLAHE)  for  enhancement  of  multimodal  biometric images[J]. Wireless Personal Communications, 2019, 106: 651-680.

[32]. Ribeiro E, Uhl A, Alonso-Fernandez F. Super-resolution and image re-projection for iris recognition[C]//2019 IEEE 5th International Conference on Identity, Security, and Behavior Analysis (ISBA). IEEE, 2019: 1-7

[33].  Guo  Y,  Wang  Q,  Huang  H,  et  al.  Adversarial  iris  super  resolution[C]//2019 International Conference on Biometrics (ICB). IEEE, 2019: 1-8

[34] Lee Y W, Kim J S, Park K R. Ocular Biometrics with Low-Resolution Images Based on Ocular Super-Resolution CycleGAN[J]. Mathematics, 2022, 10(20): 3818.

[35]. Huang C E, Li Y H, Aslam M S, et al. Super-resolution generative adversarial network based on the dual dimension attention mechanism for biometric image superresolution[J]. Sensors, 2021, 21(23): 7817

[36]  Yang  L,  Wang  S,  Ma  S,  et  al.  Hifacegan:  Face  renovation  via  collaborative suppression and replenishment[C]//Proceedings of the 28th  ACM  international conference on multimedia. 2020: 1551-1560

[37]. Chen C, Li X, Yang L, et al. Progressive semantic-aware style transformation for blind face restoration[C]//Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2021: 11896-11905.

[38]. Menon S, Damian A, Hu S, et al. Pulse: Self-supervised photo upsampling via latent space exploration of generative models[C]//Proceedings of the ieee/cvf conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2020: 2437-2445

- [39]. Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation[C]//Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention-MICCAI 2015: 18th international conference, Munich, Germany, October 5-9, 2015, proceedings, part III 18. Springer International Publishing, 2015: 234-241.
- [40]  Karras  T,  Laine  S, Aila  T. A  style-based  generator  architecture  for  generative adversarial networks[C]//Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2019: 4401-4410.
- [41] Karras T, Laine S, Aittala M, et al. Analyzing and improving the image quality of stylegan[C]//Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2020: 8110-8119.
- [42] Deng J, Guo J, Xue N, et al. Arcface: Additive angular margin loss for deep face recognition[C]//Proceedings  of  the  IEEE/CVF  conference  on  computer  vision  and pattern recognition. 2019: 4690-4699.
- [43] Koh P W, Nguyen T, Tang Y S, et al. Concept bottleneck models[C]//International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 2020: 5338-5348.
Qi Xiong Xinman Zhang Jun Shen
A Prior Embedding-Driven Architecture for Long Distance Blind Iris Recognition
Blind iris images, which result from unknown degradation during the process
of iris recognition at long distances, often lead to decreased iris recognition
rates. Currently, little existing literature offers a solution to this problem.
In response, we propose a prior embedding-driven architecture for long distance
blind iris recognition. We first proposed a blind iris image restoration
network called Iris-PPRGAN. To effectively restore the texture of the blind
iris, Iris-PPRGAN includes a Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) used as a
Prior Decoder, and a DNN used as the encoder. To extract iris features more
efficiently, we then proposed a robust iris classifier by modifying the
bottleneck module of InsightFace, which called Insight-Iris. A low-quality
blind iris image is first restored by Iris-PPRGAN, then the restored iris image
undergoes recognition via Insight-Iris. Experimental results on the public
CASIA-Iris-distance dataset demonstrate that our proposed method significantly
superior results to state-of-the-art blind iris restoration methods both
quantitatively and qualitatively, Specifically, the recognition rate for
long-distance blind iris images reaches 90% after processing with our methods,
representing an improvement of approximately ten percentage points compared to
images without restoration.