Performance Improvement for 2-D Face Recognition
Using Multi-Classifier and BPN
Mohannad Abuzneid
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
University of Bridgeport, USA
Mohannad.abuzneid@gmail.com
Abstract— Human face recognition and detection has
become a very interesting field for the researcher and this
interest is motivated by the huge demand of extensive
applications of the real time surveillance system and the static
matching system like DMV licenses, port authority and bank
system. The image processing, neural network and computer
vision are the most area active research areas .Many of papers
and approaches have been introduced in the past decades. It is
difficult to create and design an efficient computational system
for accurate human face recognition because of the complex
visual of the human face, which changes dramatically based on
the variant effects. In this paper, we propose a new framework
for 2D face recognition using five different distance algorithms
and Backpropagation Neural network (BPN) to improve
conventional Principal Component Analysis (PCA) approach.
The performance of the new framework is compared with the
performance of the K Nearest-Neighbor (KNN) classifier using
five different distance algorithms then we combine them using
the least square root algorithm to achieve a higher accuracy.
Our experimental results on AT&T (formerly ORL) and Yale
face databases show that our proposed method improves the
overall performance of face recognition system with respect to
existing approaches. The results show the high accuracy can be
achieved by using %15 of the image features which increases the
recognition performance rate with less computational cost than
the existing methods.
Index Terms- Principal component analysis (PCA); K
Nearest-Neighbor; Backpropagation neural network (BPN).
I INTRODUCTION
The challenge in 2D-face recognition and detection are
due to the fact that the human face images are variable. The
reasons of this variability due to the individual appearance,
facial expression, pose variation, facial expression and the
poor illumination as showing in Fig.1 [1]. The lighting
variability includes intensity, number of light sources,
direction and the camera location as showing in Fig. 2. The
variations between the human face images of the same person
due to pose and illumination are usually larger than face
image variations due to changes in the face personality [2].
This variability makes 2D-face recognition an excessive,
interesting and challenging problem. To design high
performance algorithms for automatic face recognition
systems is a challenging task for real time computer vision
and pattern recognition applications.
Human-face recognition system requires huge amount
of similarity computing time using powerful classification
methods. Reducing the image’s dimension improves the
recognition and classification processing time. One of the
Ausif Mahmood
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
University of Bridgeport, USA
Mahmood@bridgeport.edu
popular common approaches which is used for data re-
representation and feature extraction is the PCA, also known
as Karhunen-Loeve expansion [3]. The most variations in
Fig. 1. Same person with pose variation and facial expression.
the image data are retained after reducing the dimensionality
of the image and provide solid representation of the human
face. The concept of the PCA is to translate the human face
in to a smaller set of features data and keep the variations in
the image data characteristic which is called Eigen-Faces
and they are the principal components of the initial training
set of the human face images. In the recognition testing
process, unknown face image is projected in to a reduced
dimension human face space obtained by the Eigen Faces
then classified by distance classifiers or statistical method.
Fig. 2. The same person can look different person under variant lighting
environments. In the left image, the light source is front of the head; in
the right image, the light source is from left side.
Most of recognition systems methodology for human
face has three phases which is shown in Fig. 3: (1)
Preprocessing which consist of face normalization, scaling,
resizing, detection, elimination of background noise and
excluding part of the face which may affect the face
recognition rate. (2) Feature extraction and dimension
reduction by applying significant powerful transformation
methods in face recognition systems. One of these statistical
approach transformations is the PCA [3] [4]. PCA represents
human face images as a subset of their Eigen Vectors which
is called Eigen-Faces. Many methods proposed in this filed
like Diagonal PCA [5], Curvelet based PC A [6]. Yang et al
[7] proposed Kernel PCA and Kernel FLD for human face
recognition, which they called Kernel Fisher-face and Kernel
Eigen-face methods. The modular PCA [8] approach has
achieved the high accuracy of PCA in cases of extreme
change of pose variations, illumination and expressions.
Fig. 3. Face recognition systems methodology
Bartlett et al [9] and Draper et al. [10] introduced a
generalization of PCA called Independent Component
Analysis (ICA) and they assumed a better basis of the human
face images may be found by methods which are sensitive to
these high-order statistics. On the other hand, Moghaddam
[11] showed that ICA-based approach does not provide
significant advantage over PCA-based method. Yang [12]
applied the Kernel PCA for human face feature extraction and
recognition and showed that the Kernel PCA method
outperforms the classical PCA method. However, Kernel
PCA and ICA are both computationally more expensive than
PCA.
Yang et al [13] introduced a new approach, 2-
dimensional principal component analysis (2DPCA) for
image feature extraction and representation which has
numerous advantages over conventional PCA. It is more
straightforward than the PCA to use for face image extraction
because 2DPCA is based on the image matrix. Based on
Yang method, the 2DPCA is better than conventional PCA in
terms of recognition accuracy and 2DPCA is computationally
more efficient than conventional PCA and it can improve the
process time of image feature extraction significantly. On the
other hand, the conventional PCA based image representation
is more efficient than the 2DPCA-based image representation
in terms of storage space because 2DPCA needs more
coefficients for face representation.
Lu et al [14] introduced a new feature extraction method
for face recognition using Linear Discriminate Analysis
(LDA) method. Numerous kernel based classifier methods
[15]-[18] have been developed to handle the nonlinear
problems. The new method safely eliminate the null space
between class scatter matrix by utilizing the variant of D-
LDA and improve the discriminatory power of the obtained
D-LDA feature dimension by applying a partial step LDA
scheme. Many researcher claim the advantage of LDA over
PCA but Martez et al [19] illustrates why the PCA perform
better than the LDA when the training dataset is non data
non-uniformly sampled or number of samples per person is
small. (3) Classification by employing powerful classifiers
such as neural networks [23], [24], support vector machine
(SVM) [26], Euclidean distance classifier [21], Mahalanobis
distance classifier [22], Hidden Markov Models (HMMs)
[25], and extreme learning machine (ELM) [27].
In our proposed work, we apply few preprocessing
algorithms to reduce the computational processing time. For
feature extraction and face representation we used
conventional PCA and we considered only the highest 30
eigenvalues and their corresponding eigenvectors. We used
five classification methods:- Correlation, Euclidean,
Canberra, Manhattan and Mahalanobis distance classifier.
Backpropagation neural network used to train the face
recognition system. The proposed methods provide higher
accuracy than the existing methods and we applied the
method on two of the benchmark databases, ORL database
and Yale database.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section II,
overview of conventional PCA, classification methods and
Backpropagation neural network. The details of the
proposed framework will be discussed in Section III.
Experimental results are discussed in Section IV. Section V
describes the conclusion of this paper and the future work.
II CONVENTIONAL PCA, CLASSIFICATION METHODS
AND BACKPROPAGATION NEURAL NETWORK
A. Principal Component Analysis.
It is typical to perform features reduction and face
representation since correlation methods require huge
amounts of storage and an expensive computation time.
PCA is a holistic based statistical transform and
transforms the face data to a new face coordinate
system by projection the greatest disparity of the face
data to lie on the first coordinate then the second greatest
disparity on the next coordinate and finally the lowest
disparity lie on the last coordinate. We reduce the face
data dimension in the face recognition by applying the
PCA method which is finding the principal components
for the training face database then using the K high
eigenvalues and their corresponding eigenvectors to
represent the face image in lower dimensional face space
with less number of points [28]. Because the PCA
method relies on the covariance matrix, the dimension of
the face images is not substantial in comparison to
number of face images in the training dataset. PCA
extracts the new data set in an efficient way based on the
related information between the face images and reduces
the description dimension by projecting the data onto the
axes of the principal components, where these
orthonormal data points are in the maximum covariance
direction.
The first step in the PCA is to obtain the same size face
images I1, I2, ….,IM, then convert each face to vector .The
training set of M faces can be written as I = (I1, I2,… , IN) and
the average image ‘A’ is found by
= ∑ (1)
 The next step is to center each face image and find the Backpropagation neural network is one of the most
vector = − . To obtain the covariance matrix ‘C’ common used neural networks since BPN offers a great
from the difference image using: simplification abilities and it is straightforward to implement.
Even though it may be harder to determine the best network
1
weights and network configuration. The design of BPN used
= = ( ) (2) is described below: 1). Training input layer 2). Hidden layer
(one or more) 3). Expected output layer [1] as shown in Fig.5.

ℎ = [Φ Φ … … … Φ ] ( ) The common backpropagation algorithm can be

described as∶
The eigenvalues and their corresponding
eigenvectors of the covariance matrix are computed and []
1. Randomly initialize the weights and the
they are related as: []
thresholds , let n=l.
= ( ) 2. Feed the input training image pattern and the
corresponding match output image pattern
We sort the Eigen-Values and their corresponding through the propagation neural network then
Eigen-Vectors and we take in our consideration the top K of calculate the output of all layers according to :
them to reduce the face domain. Approximately 90% of the
total discrepancy is exist in the first 15% of the face space [
= (∑
]
+ )
[ ] []
(9)
[ ]
which means that the Eigen-Values are exponentially
3. Compute the square root error in each layer as
decrease. PCA produces a new face image for the original
follows:
face image which appears as a ghostly face, which is called
In the output layer:
Eigen-Faces as shown in Fig. 4.
[ ] [ ] [ ]
= ′( )( − ) (10)

In the lth hidden layer (l=L-1, L-2 ... 1):

[] [] [ ] [ ]
= ′( )∑ (11)
4. Update the new threshold and weights by applying
the following formula:

[] [] []
( + )= ( )+ . (12)
[] [] [] [ ]
Fig.4. Original images and the corresponding Eigen Faces
( + )= ( )+ . . (13)
5. Calculate the mean-squared error and if the value is
B. Backpropagation neural network
less than the threshold then stop and print the
weight, else go back to step 2.

Sigmoidal function which defined in (14) used as the

neuron activation function in the backpropagation algorithm,
( )= (14)

Sigmoidal function derivatives is:

′( ) = ( )( − ( )) (15)

The mean-squared-error can reach to the minimum by

Fig.5. Schematic diagram of backpropagation (BP) neural network
with three-layer.
finding some weights using the sigmoidal activation function
and for a small size neural network it means that all image
input patterns are correctly classified but generally this will
not be true for bigger size neural network. Therefore J. Toms
proposed in 1990 an improved backpropagation algorithm by
using another activation function called hybrid neuron which
is defined as:
 ( ) = . ( ) + ( − ). ( )
(16)
Where s(x) is the sigmoidal function (14) and h(x) is the hard-
limiting function which is defined as:
≥ cropping the face, resizing the image; translate the image to
( )= (17)
<
and 0 ≤ λ ≤ 1. When λ = 0, the neuron becomes discrete hard-
limiting one and when λ = 1, the neuron is purely analog
sigmoidal one. For intermediate value of 0 ≤ λ ≤ 1, the BPN
is a hybrid, with a hidden unit activation function that is
differentiable everywhere except at λ = 0:
( )= ( ) − ( ) ≠ .
(18)
Even with J. Toms simple modification the PBN often
stuck at the local minimum and since λ is linearly decreased
to zero, the learning speed is also affected by this updating
this coefficient according to the following:
( )= /
. Eigen-Faces database using the highest 30 Eigen value with
(19)
Where SSE is the Sum-Squared-Error. The second method is
using the following sigmoidal neuron activation function with
sloping factor α in the hidden layers:
( )= (20)
Its derivative is:
( ) = . ( )( − ( ))
(21)
The coefficient α is related to the steepness of the sigmoidal
function. These modifications makes BPN fast to converge,
easy to implement, and the final error for training system is
absolutely zero.
III Proposed Framework
In our paper, we present and discuss face recognition
techniques using two different classification approaches. We
used the conventional PCA as a feature extraction method
with five different distance measurement methods to achieve
an extraordinary performance for human face recognition
system. We used the conventional PCA to extract the features
by reducing the face space using the top K-eigenvectors (K is
approximately= 15%) corresponding to the K-highest Eigen
Values .The two approaches which we used in this paper are
K Nearest-Neighbor (KNN) classifier and Backpropagation
neural network (BPN) classifier. We have applied five
different distance measurement methods. We then combined
them to show the improvement in each method. Different
scenarios are proposed in this paper to compere our result to
other proposed systems, Fig. 9 and Fig. 12 show the overall
view of the proposed face recognition system.
First, we start with preprocessing the input images by
using different methods when it is necessary. It includes
Gray image then histogram equalization, and finally
normalization the image between 0 and 255 to decrease the
effect of the image background, nose and local illumination,
which allow us to perform robust face recognition even under
severe illumination variations. Fig.6 shows some of the
preprocessing methods.
Fig.6. Example for adopted prepressing steps in the proposed work.
Then, conventional PCA is applied as a facial
representation on the preprocessed images to obtain the
their corresponding Eigenvectors. Finally, we used the five
different measurement distance methods to feed them to the
classifiers to test the system and prove the improvement on
different experiments scenarios.
V. EXPERIMENTS
In order to compare our results with the other proposed
face recognition systems, we applied our framework on two
databases, the Yale Database and the ORL Database. We
applied the other proposed system experiment scenarios to
compare our result with their result. We randomly divided
the face database into two sets: - one set for training and the
second for testing. Finally, we calculated the recognition
rate (RR) after the system has completed the training and
tested the testing images set using:
(%) = *100 (22)
The simulation environment is Microsoft visual studio
C# which runs on the personal Laptop with Intel CoreI7
CPU @ 3GHz.
A. Human Face Databases
1) Olivetti Research Laboratory Human Face
Database (ORL) [30]. ORL database has total of
400 face images which belong to 40 persons for both
female and male with 10 different images for each of
them. The images are in grayscale with size 92x112
pixels. Fig. 7 shows a sample set for one person
from ORL database.
2) YALE Face Database: The Yale face database
contains images of 15 people male and female [31].
 Fig.7. ORL database is covering 40 persons and contains 400 face images taken under 10 different conditions.

Fig.8. Sample images of Yale Face Database (11 pose for each person)

There are 165 images divided to11 images per

person. All these images are also in gray scale
domain with size of 92x112 pixels after we cropped
and resized them. Fig. 8 shows Yale sample images.

B. Experiments Using the KNN Classifier

Our Face recognition system using KNN Classifier is

showing in Fig. 9. In the experiment we applied two different
scenarios on Yale database and ORL database. First, an
experiment was performed using leaving one image out for
testing(15 for Yale and 40 for ORL for testing) then we used
random five face image samples per person for training the
system (200 in ORL and 90 in Yale for testing ) as a second
scenario. In both scenarios we start with dimensionality
reduction using PCA then we find the Egin Faces to evaluate
the testing images. We took in our consideration only the top
30 Eigen vectors to reduce the computation time. Then we Fig.9. Face recognition system using The KNN classifier
used different dissimilarity measure methods to measure the methods
similarity between the test images and the Egin faces. KNN
classifier provides the best K match and we assume the
lowest distance is the best match. We applied this scenario
with five different distances methods, Correlation distance,
Euclidean distance, Canberra distance, Manhattan distance
and Mahalanobis distance then we combined them with the
square root of the sum square equation (23) to achieve higher
recognition rate :

= ∑ (23)

We consider the face recognition occurs only when the

first lowest distance is matched the test image as showing in
Fig. 10 and we consider the face recognition failed even if the
second lowest distance matched the test image as showing in
Fig. 11.
Fig.10. Example of the match image using KNN with Mahalanobis distance.
(a) Test image (b) the first lowest distance (c)second lowest distance (d) Third
lowest distance .
 Yale database and %97.5 in ORL database by applying the
second scenario which is leaving only one face image out for
testing . Table I shows these result.
In the proposed method which is using PCA, KNN and
BPN, we achieved higher accuracy by combining the distance
methods using equation (23). We achieved %96.7 accuracy in
the Yale database with only 3 mismatching and %95.6 with 7
mismatching of 200 testing images. Table II shows the result
in details.
Fig.11. Example of the mismatch image using KNN with Mahalanobis
distance. (a) Test image (b) the first lowest distance (c)second lowest distance V. CONCLUSION
(d) Third lowest distance . In this paper we proposed an improved framework for face
recognition using PCA and BPN and combined five distance
measurement methods because each distance method has
advantage over the other methods and by combining them we
have been able to achieve a higher accuracy than the existing
C. Experiments using the BPN classifier methods. By using BPN we reduced the compute time and
The similar two scenarios, which we used in the KNN improved face recognition rate. In the future work we plan to
experiment, applied again using the BPN classifier. The apply this framework using different feature extraction
experiment was performed by leaving one image out for methods like SVM and 2D-PCA, which they are proven to
testing (15 for Yale and 40 for ORL). We then used random have advantage over the conventional PCA
five image samples per person for training the system (200
for ORL and 90 for Yale). Fig.12 shows the proposed face
recognition system which is divided to three subsystems. TABLE I
Experiments result using PCA and KNN
First, we do subsystem, which includes preprocessing
and features extraction. After preprocessing the training
images as we mentioned earlier by applying some of the Strategy Method Recognition Rate (%)
translation methods to reduce the external effects, we PCA and KNN Yale ORL
extracted the highest effects feature using the PCA method. Using Canberra Distance 96.6 95
Next, we found the Egin Faces database based on the highest five
Euclidean Distance 87.8 90.5
K eigenvectors, which will be used in the classification random
between the training images and the test images sets. images Correlation Distance 90 91
for
The second subsystem is to train the proposed system training Manhattan Distance 91.1 95
by feeding the training dataset to the Backpropagation Mahalanobis Distance 94.4 95
neural network. Using the Eigen Faces, which we found in Leave- Canberra Distance 93.3 90
the first subsystem we found the lowest distance between one-out
Euclidean Distance 93.3 97.5
each training image and the Eigen Faces. Then we added the Method
lowest distance for each training image to the training Correlation Distance 100 97.5
dataset. After that, we fed the training dataset to the BPN Manhattan Distance 100 97.5
with 0.3 training rate and one hidden layer. Mahalanobis Distance 100 97.5
The third subsystem is examining the recognition
system by testing the test images and finding the face
recognition rate. First, we find the Egin Face for the test TABLE II
image then find the distance between the test image and the Experiments result using PCA and BPN
Egin Faces database using five different methods. Finally, Strategy Method Recognition Rate (%)
we fed these distances to the BPN and found out if the test PCA and BPN Yale ORL
image matches the right person or not.
Using Canberra Distance 88.9 80
five
D. Results and Analysis Euclidean Distance 75.6 79.5
random
images Correlation Distance 89.9 85.5
In the first experiment using the PCA and KNN with for
%50 of the dataset for training and %50 for testing, we training Manhattan Distance 87.8 89.5
achieved variant accuracy based on which distance methods Mahalanobis Distance 94.4 95
applied. Canberra Distance achieved %96.6 accuracy with Proposed
only 3 mismatching in the Yale database. Mahalanobis
: ∑ 96.7 96.5
Distance achieved %95 accuracy with only 10 mismatching
on the ORL database. The accuracy increased to %100 in
 Fig.12. Proposed recognition system using the BPN classifier method
REFERENCES
[1] R. Chellappa, C. L.Wilson, and S. Sirohey, “Human and machine
recognition of faces: A survey,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 83, pp. 705–740,
1995 J. Clerk Maxwell, A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism,
3rd ed., vol. 2. Oxford: Clarendon, 1892, pp.68–73.
[2] P. N. Belhumeur, J. P. Hespanha, and D. J. Kriegman,
“Eigenfaces versus fisherfaces: Recognition using class specific
linear projection”, ,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell.,
vol. 19, pp. 711–720, 1997.
[3] M. A. Turk and A. P. Pentland, “Eigenfaces for Recognition,” J.
Cogn. Neuroscience. vol. 3, pp. 71–6, 1991.
[4] L. Sirovich and M. Kirby, ªA Low-Dimensional Procedure for the
Characterization of Human Faces,º J. Optical Soc. Am. A, vol. 4,
no. 3, pp. 519-524, 1987
[5] D. Zhang, Z. Zhou, and S. Chen, “Diagonal Principal Component
Analysis for Face Recognition,” Pattern Recognition, vol 39, pp.
140142, 2006.
[6] T. Mandal, Q.M.J. Wu, and Y. Yuan, “Curvelet based face
recognition via dimension reduction,” Elsevier, Signal Processing,
vol 89, no. 3, pp. 2345-2353, 2009.
[7] M.H. Yang, “Kernel Eigenfaces vs. Kernel Fisherfaces: Face
Recognition Using Kernel Methods,” Proc. Fifth IEEE Int’l Conf.
Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition (RGR’02), pp. 215-220,
May 2002.
[8] R. Gottumukkal and V.K. Ansri, “An improved face recognition
technique based on Mudular PCA approach,” Pattern Recognition
letters, vol 25, pp. 429-436, 2004.
[9] M.S. Bartlett, J.R. Movellan, and T.J. Sejnowski, “Face
Recognition by Independent Component Analysis,” IEEE Trans.
Neural Networks, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 1450-1464, 2002.
[10] B.A. Draper, K. Baek, M.S. Bartlett, J.R. Beveridge,
“Recognizing Faces with PCA and ICA,” Computer Vision and
Image Understanding: special issue on face recognition, in press
[11] B. Moghaddam. Principal manifolds and bayesian subspaces for
visual recognition. In Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE
International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 1131{1136,
1999.
[12] P.C. Yuen and J.H. Lai, “Face representation using Independent
Component Analysis,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 35, no. 6, pp.
12471257, 2002.
[13] J. Yang, D. Zhang, A.F. Frangi, and J.Y. Yang, “Two-
dimensional PCA: a new approach to appearance-based face
representation and recognition,” IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis
and Machine Intelligence, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 131-137, Jan. 2004.
[14] J. Lu, K. N. Plataniotis, A. N. Venetsanopoulos, “ Face
Recognition using LDA based Algorithms,” IEEE Trans. on
Neural Networks 14 (1) , pp 195-200, 2003.
[15] W. Zheng, L. Zhao, C. Zou A modified algorithm for generalized
discriminant analysis. Neural Computation, 16(6): 1283–1297,
2004.
[16] J. Yang, A. F. Frangi, J. Y. Yang, D. Zhang, Z. Jin, KPCA Plus
LDA: A complete kernel fisher discriminant framework for
feature extraction and recognition. IEEE Transaction on Pattern
Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 27(2): 230–244,2005
[17] W. S. Chen, P. C. Yuen, Kernel Interpolatory Mercer kernel
construction for kernel direct LDA on face recognition, Submitted
to 2009 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and
Signal Processing (ICASSP2009).
[18] J. Huang, P. C. Yuen, W. S. Chen, J. H. Lai, Face Recognition
Using Kernel Subsapce LDA Algorithm. Proceeding of Asian
Conference on Computer Vison (ACCV04), 1:61–66, 2004.
[19] A. Martez, A. Kak, “PCA versus LDA,” IEEE Trans. on Pattern
Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol.23, no. 2, February 2001,
pp.228-233.
[20] J. R. Solar, and P. Navarreto, “Eigen space-based face
recognition: A comparative study of different approaches”, IEEE
Transactions on Systems man And Cybernetics- part c:
Applications, vol. 35, no.3, 2005.
[21] Duda R, Hart P, Stork D. “Pattern Classification,” 2nd edn.,
WileyInterscience, New York, (2001).
[22] N. A. Mahmon, N. Ya’acob, and A. L. Yusof, “Differences of
Image Classification Techniques for Land Use and Land Cover
Classification” IEEE Trans. CSPA, pp.90-94, 2015.
[23] M. J. Er, W. Chen, and S. Wu, “High speed face recognition
based on discrete cosine transform and RBF neural network”,
IEEE Trans. on Neural Network, vol. 16, no.3, pp. 679-691, 2005.
[24] M. Er, S. Wu, J. Lu, and L.H.Toh, “ ”, IEEE Transactions
on Neural Networks, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 697-710, 2003.
[25] H. Othman, and T. Aboulnasr, “A separable low complexity 2D
HMM with application to face recognition”, IEEE Transaction
on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 25, no.10, pp.
1229-1238, 2003.
[26] K. Lee, Y. Chung, and H. Byun, “SVM based face verification
with feature set of small size”, Electronic letters, vol. 38, no.15,
pp. 787-789, 2002.
[27] A.A. Mohammed, R. Minhas, Q.M. Jonathan Wu, and M.A. Sid-
Ahmed, “Human face recognition based on Multidimensional
PCA and extreme learning machine,” Pattern Recognition, vol
44, pp. 2588-2597, 2011.
[28] M. Kirby and L. Sirvoich, “Application of the Karhunen-Loeve
Procedure for the characterization of human faces,” IEEE Trans.
Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 12, no. 1, pp.
103–108, Jan. 1990.
[29] Perumal, K. and Bhaskaran, R. “Supervised classification
Performance of multispectral images” in Journal of computing,
2(2), arXiv:1002.4046v1, 2010.
[30] ORL database: http://www.camorl.co.uk.
[31] Yale Face Database: http://cvc.yale.edu/projects/yalefaces/