ForgeXplain: An Explainable Machine Learning System for Offline Signature Forgery Detection

References

[1] Khalifa OO, Hashim AHA, Samad SA. Offline signature verification and forgery detection: A review. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security. 2011;11(3):170–176.

[2] Ghanim TM, Nabil AM. Offline signature verification and forgery detection approach. In: 2018 13th International Conference on Computer Engineering and Systems (ICCES); 2018. p. 293–298. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCES.2018.8639420

[3] Thenuwara M, Nagahamulla HRK. Offline handwritten signature verification system using Random Forest classifier. In: 17th International Conference on Advances in ICT for Emerging Regions (ICTer); 2017. p. 191–196. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTER.2017.8257828

[4] Larkins RL, Mayo M. Adaptive feature thresholding for off-line signature verification. In: 23rd International Conference Image and Vision Computing New Zealand (IVCNZ); 2008. p. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVCNZ.2008.4762072

[5] Wajid R, Malik H, Malik MI. Offline signature verification using local binary pattern features. International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence. 2014;28(7):1456003. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218001414560036

[6] Ooi SY, Teoh ABJ, Pang YH. Radon transform based approach for offline signature verification. Expert Systems with Applications. 2013;40(17):6838–6846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.06.042

[7] Hafemann LG, Sabourin R, Oliveira LS. Learning features for offline handwritten signature verification using deep convolutional neural networks. Pattern Recognition. 2017;70:163–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2017.05.012

[8] Dey S, Dutta A, Toledo JI, Ghosh SK, Lladós J, Pal U. SigNet: Convolutional Siamese network for writer independent offline signature verification. Pattern Recognition Letters. 2019;128:182–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2017.07.024

[9] Guerbai A, Chibani Y, Hadjadji B. The effective use of one-class SVM classifier for handwritten signature verification based on writer-independent parameters. Pattern Recognition. 2015;48(1):103–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2014.07.015

[10] Lundberg SM, Lee S-I. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 2017;30:4765–4774.

[11] Kiran P, Parameshachari BD, Yashwanth J, Bharath KN. Offline signature recognition using image processing techniques and back propagation neuron network system. SN Computer Science. 2021;2(3):196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-021-00591-y

[12] Poddar J, Parikh V, Bharti SK. Offline signature recognition and forgery detection using deep learning. Procedia Computer Science. 2020;170:610–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.03.133

[13] Hashim Z, Ahmed HM, Alkhayyat AH. A comparative study among handwritten signature verification methods using machine learning techniques. Scientific Programming. 2022;2022:8170424. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8170424

[14] Wang Z, Muhammat M, Yadikar N, Aysa A, Ubul K. Advances in offline handwritten signature recognition research: A review. IEEE Access. 2023;11:120222–120236. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3326471

@article{1723878,
      author = {Madiha Kaunain, Nalini M, Noor Ayesha, R. Saaranya M. E.},
      title = {ForgeXplain: An Explainable Machine Learning System for Offline Signature Forgery Detection},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {4},
      pages = {2314-2323},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1723878.pdf},
      abstract = {Achieving accurate signature verification is critical in many contexts including financial transactions and legal contracts, for reasons of security and fraud risk. The authors describe an offline signature verification system called ForgeXplain that uses hand engineered image features in conjunction with machine learning algorithms and explainable AI. From pre-processed signature images the system extracts 23 hand designed geometric and intensity features that in turn feed into support vector machine (SVM) and random forest (RF) models in order to predict fake from real signatures, with SHAP values explaining the decision on a feature-by-feature basis. A test of 1,320 real and 1,320 fake signatures from CEDAR offline found that Random Forest was correct 91.5 percent of the time and achieved a ROC-AUC score of 0.966, better than SVM. This shows that ForgeXplain can tackle off-line signature forgery detection effectively and faithfully.},
      keywords = {signature verification; forgery detection; explainable AI; SHAP; random forest; support vector machine; CEDAR dataset},
      month = {October},
  }