mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Systematic Failure Analysis of Vision Foundation Models for Open Set Iris Presentation Attack Detection

arXiv 2605.19020 ↗First posted 18 May 2026cs.CVcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Vision foundation models have demonstrated strong transferability across diverse visual recognition tasks and are increasingly considered for biometric applications. Their suitability for iris Presentation Attack Detection (PAD), particularly under realistic open-set operating conditions, remains insufficiently examined. This work presents a systematic failure analysis of general-purpose vision foundation models for open-set iris PAD using periocular imagery. Five representative foundation models are evaluated under three open-set protocols that explicitly separate different sources of distribution shift: unseen Presentation Attack Instruments (PAIs), unseen datasets captured with different sensors and cross-spectral transfer from near-infrared (NIR) to visible spectrum (VIS) imagery. Both frozen feature representations and parameter-efficient task adaptation using Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) are assessed within a unified experimental framework. The results indicate that foundation models can transfer across datasets with similar sensing characteristics, but fail to generalise reliably to unseen attack instruments and degrade sharply under cross-spectral evaluation. While LoRA improves performance in certain cross-dataset settings, it frequently amplifies failure under attack-level and spectral shifts. Additional validation experiments using segmented iris inputs, full backbone fine-tuning, joint cross-dataset and cross-PAI shifts, and reverse VIS to NIR transfer further confirm that these failures are not simply artefacts of periocular input, weak adaptation, or one-directional spectral evaluation. These findings show that strong closed-set or cross-dataset performance should not be treated as evidence of robust open-set security, and highlight the need for PAD representations that maintain sensitivity to presentation artefacts while remaining stable under realistic deployment variation.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 May 2026.

Builds on

13 of 36 references.

References · 13

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
  2. 2023DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervisioncited by 7,974
  3. 2023EVA-02: A Visual Representation for Neon Genesiscited by 381
  4. 2022Deep Learning for Iris Recognition: A Surveycited by 25
  5. 2018Assessment of iris recognition reliability for eyes affected by ocular pathologiescited by 17
  6. 2025OpenVision: A Fully-Open, Cost-Effective Family of Advanced Vision Encoders for Multimodal Learningcited by 16
  7. 2025Benchmarking Foundation Models for Zero-Shot Biometric Taskscited by 14
  8. 2020Micro Stripes Analyses for Iris Presentation Attack Detectioncited by 6
  9. 2024Privacy-Safe Iris Presentation Attack Detectioncited by 6
  10. 2025Towards Iris Presentation Attack Detection with Foundation Modelscited by 6
  11. 2024A Parametric Approach to Adversarial Augmentation for Cross-Domain Iris Presentation Attack Detectioncited by 4
  12. 2021Introduction to Presentation Attack Detection in Iris Biometrics and Recent Advancescited by 3
1 more
  1. 2025SpectraIrisPAD: Leveraging Vision Foundation Models for Spectrally Conditioned Multispectral Iris Presentation Attack Detectioncited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.