Skip to content

2 papers indexed here

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Review Open access Aug 2026

Segmentation and Multimodal Fusion in Ocular Biometric Recognition: A Review

Accurate segmentation of ocular regions is a fundamental prerequisite for robust ocular biometric recognition, as it affects feature extraction, multimodal representation, and subsequent matching under unconstrained conditions. This review focuses on ocular region segmentation as an essential component of biometric recognition rather than an isolated semantic segmentation task. We survey major segmentation paradigms, including traditional image-processing methods, deep learning architectures, and emerging foundation-model-based approaches, and analyze their applications in delineating the iris, sclera, pupil, and periocular structures under challenges such as occlusion, illumination variation, specular reflection, and motion blur. We further categorize multimodal ocular fusion strategies into three levels—data-, feature-, and decision-level fusion—and compare their information preservation, alignment requirements, computational complexity, and deployment suitability. To facilitate reproducible evaluation, we review representative public datasets and benchmark protocols, summarizing their acquisition characteristics, annotation properties, and evaluation metrics. Finally, we discuss practical considerations for method selection and highlight persistent challenges, including image-quality degradation, cross-spectral and cross-sensor domain shifts, limited dataset diversity, and cross-modal misalignment. Future research directions are outlined toward standardized, quality-aware, efficient, and deployable ocular biometric recognition systems.   Received: 5 April 2026 | Revised: 30 June 2026 | Accepted: 27 July 2026    Conflicts of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to this work.   Data Availability Statement No new data were generated or collected in this review article. This study is based exclusively on previously published literature and publicly available ocular biometric datasets. The datasets mentioned in this review, including iris, sclera, pupil, and periocular image databases, can be accessed through the original publications or repositories maintained by their respective dataset providers. The authors did not create, modify, or redistribute any dataset during this study.   Author Contribution Statement Yansuo Yu: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition. Yongbin Qi: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization. Shilin Zhao: Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Visualization. Huanzhang Qi: Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Visualization. Wendao Li: Resources, Visualization. Haoqi Zhang: Resources, Visualization. Da Teng: Validation, Formal analysis, Resources, Supervision, Project administration. Qiang Liu: Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition.

Yansuo Yu, Yongbin Qi, Shilin Zhao et al. · 0 citations
Conference Jul 2026

Unmasking the algorithm: a review of algorithmic bias and fairness in medical AI and image processing

The integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) into medical image processing has substantial potential for transforming diagnostic workflows, accelerating image reconstruction, and improving clinical decision-making. However, this technological shift brings significant ethical challenges, particularly concerning algorithmic bias and fairness. This paper reviews the ethical issues surrounding AI-generated content in medical imaging, focusing on how biases are introduced and amplified, and how they impact patient care across diverse demographic groups. We categorize the taxonomy of ethical concerns—including algorithmic fairness, privacy, transparency, and clinical accountability—and trace the workflow of bias from unrepresentative training datasets through flawed objective functions to biased clinical deployment. By analyzing the vulnerabilities of generative models, such as Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and diffusion models, we examine the phenomenon of underdiagnosis bias and the magnification of historical disparities. We also discuss mitigation strategies, including data-centric approaches to ensure representative sampling and model-centric techniques such as adversarial debiasing. Ensuring fairness and equity in medical AI is necessary for its safe and effective clinical adoption.

G. Shi, Hailian Zhang, Chun Xie et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.