Multibio Authentication of OnlineUsers in

Proctoring And E-Learning

NITHISH KUMAR C M
VISHAL S Dr P AJITHA
B TECH INFORMATION
B TECH INFORMATION ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR/IT DEPT
TECHNOLOGY
TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF COMPUTING
SATHYABAMA INSTITUE OF
SATHYABAMA INSTITUE OF SATHYABAMA INSTITUE OF
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU
CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU
nithishmohan2002@gmail.com
vishalmuki@gmail.com ajitha.it@sathyabama.ac.in
A. Abstract— Online courses have become more popular
recently as a brand-new method of instructing students
in distance literacy settings. However, as demand grows,
educational institutions are faced with the difficulty of
determining how to verify that online students are who
they say they are throughout learning activities,
particularly exams. Mortal proctoring is a non-scalable
method that calls for someone to oversee every student
ever. On the other hand, automated proctors frequently
focus on a certain kind of device and confirm the
students' attendance without taking into account their
interactions with the e-learning platform. In this study,
we present a multi-biometric system that is
device/commerce independent and aims to continuously
and transparently validate both presence and commerce.
Through the use of a score-position emulsion of several
biometric responses (facial, voice, touch) based on the
device The system is suitable to attest to the student's
identification throughout the literacy experience
depending on how it is used and the commerce that is
conducted with it. Our donation has a fair chance of
providing flexible and reliable support on a wider range
of online tests when compared to existing alternatives.
Keywords— Proctoring, Python IDE, SQLLITE, CNN,
LSTM.
I. INTRODUCTION
Online courses have recently become a versatile
technique to instruct big groups of researchers in distance
learning settings. However, as demand rises, educational
institutions must contend with the difficulty of evaluating
the honesty of their operations without student involvement.
In this setting, fraudsters taking part in online surveys and
fake IDs for other pharmaceuticals are potential hazards.
Educational institutions should (i) support online students'
individuality, (ii) make sure they pass tests honestly, and
(iii) evaluate their performance correctly to reduce these
issues. The first job, which tries to show that e-learning
requirements are met by a certified learner, is the subject of
this article. Typically, during online exams, the findings are
only meant for academic purposes.
Typically, they do not take into account participation in
other courses. Researchers can conduct web-based studies
with ongoing human observation using a standard approach
(e.g., Kriterion1 and ProctorU2). It is not scaleable and is
reliant on the supervisor's mortal abilities. Other systems,
such ProctorFree3 and RemoteProctorNow, do the same
thing with post- or real-time analysis but at a lesser cost
because they do away with the die problem.These
approaches do not always hold true when researchers want
to falsify data, particularly when conducting experiments.
The authentication process must be visible and continuous
without interfering with the student's regular health.
In this setting, numerous academic and commercial research
organisations have put forth diverse.) Single-biometric
systems among them typically seek to compute face and/or
body signals. Because they rationalise trading a student,
simply watching them won't stop them from cheating. We
seek to confirm both the commodity that the student is and
the stone manufacturer in any combination of business and
device since facial recognition is efficient but lacks business
while other biometrics support business but are
insufficiently accurate on their own. Additionally, nearly all
prejudices have detectors that verify their biometrics. The
outcome is a multi-biometric system that is independent of
device/transaction. Our approach adds a temporal
authentication window to take advantage of various
biometric emulsions. The association of biometric data
occurs throughout a series of fixed-duration time intervals.
The information kept in that window is sent to the multi-
biometric system for the identification procedure when the
temporary window expires. The final step is to compare the
overall authentication score to the acceptance threshold; if
the score is lower, the student can continue the reading time;
if not, the system tightens access control. We dissected the
reliability metrics and normalisation functions of the
important points. We also made the choice to use the
QuasiLinear Sigmoid (QLS) function to get comparable and
objective results for various subsystems. Our solution is
ideally positioned to provide a flexible and trustworthy
instrument system for various e-learning services (such
course participation, quizzes, or final exams) that supports a
larger bias and relationship as compared to the already used
ways.
The following benefits are provided by this paper:
• We build a device/interaction agnostic system where
various multi-biometric traits are integrated based on the
type of interaction and the device being used for
authentication at any given time. present-day stonemason.
• In order to continually verify researchers on desktop and
mobile while supporting the most popular forms of
communication, we propose to combine a multi-biometric
system into a single learning platform.
• To compare the proposed approach to the most recent
authentication outcomes in the context of e-learning
platforms, we map the results.
II. LITERATURE SURVEY
A. Title: Towards security objectives for summative online
assessments
Author: Gary Wills and Kikelomo Maria Apampa
Year: 2009
Description: Confidentiality, integrity, and availability (C-I-
A), which safeguard vital resources from potential dangers,
may be part of a computer system's overall security
objectives. Although C-I-A's security objects are well-
studied, they might not be enough to meet all of the
requirements for the entire e-assessment. We do not
disparage the CIA's core security goals in this document.
Instead, we establish security objectives that are unique to
the security of an electronic summary assessment.
B. Title: Online Exam Proctoring with Automation
Author: Liping Chen and Yousef Atoum
Year: 2017
Description: Massive open online courses (MOOCs) and
other types of distant learning are becoming more and more
well-known. One significant barrier to the scaling of this
next stage of training is the capacity to observe online
remote tests efficiently. Human testing, which requires the
test subject to visit the testing facility or be observed
physically and acoustically through a webcam while taking
the test, is now the most popular assessment method. We
build more sophisticated features that categorise if a test
taker is cheating at any point in the test by integrating the
elements of continuous assessment and employing a
temporal sliding window. Numerous test results demonstrate
the accuracy, dependability, and potency of our online test
shadowing system.
C. Title: e-learner authentication leveraging multimodal
biometric technologies
Author: C. CHELLAPPAN AND S. ASHA
Year: 2008
Description: E-learning platforms are a brand-new method
of education that are gaining popularity daily. However, the
issue with e-learning platforms is that not enough money is
spent on security. User authentication techniques can be
categorised into one of three groups: (1) those based on
human memory (such as passwords), (2) those based on
physical device bias (such as magnetic or IC cards), and (3)
those based on biometric data. Because the first two
categories cannot completely eliminate the vulnerability of
being forgotten or lost, the third category currently garners a
lot of attention. The fundamental issue with biometric
authentication is that it contains errors when comparing
biometric data and extracting human traits. When a single
biometric verification technique is unable to provide the
needed degree of reliability, multi-biometrics can be used to
increase the reliability of biometric verification. In order to
serve diverse e-learning applications that demand user
authentication, this article suggests the usage of numerous
biometric authentication methods.
D. Title: Student Authentication Using Keystroke
Biometrics: A Case Study
Author: Aythami Morales
Year: 2015
Description: In this essay, a case study of the use of
biometric technology for student authentication is presented.
We analyse the subtleties of a keystroke dynamic algorithm
used to authenticate students during a live online exam for a
course on basic computer knowledge System Analysis.
3.1 Existing system
Despite the fact that many educational institutions have
implemented computer-based collaborative learning during
the past 10 years, there are still gaps that restrict their ability
to foster collaborative learning. The issue with e-learning
systems, however, is that not enough money is spent on
security. Additionally, one of the biggest challenges in an
online learning environment is authenticating students,
particularly when it comes to e-exams. The fundamental
issue with biometric authentication is that it contains errors
when comparing biometric data and extracting human traits.
Disadvantages:
 A new mapping function that cannot get beyond
the drawbacks of conventional methods is a
normalisation function.
 Students' eyes may become fatigued since they
must look at screens all the time.
 Why Learning in a classroom is engaging by
nature; doing it while seated in front of a computer
or smartphone is dull.
3.2 Proposed System
We suggest a multi-biometric system that can continually
and transparently validate both presence and commerce,
regardless of the device or type of business. The system may
establish the identification of the learner during the learning
process by performing point-level aggregation of multiple
biometric responses (facial, voice, and touch) based on the
device in use and contact with it. Our addition has a strong
possibility of offering flexible and dependable support for a
larger range of web experiences, according to an initial
comparison with existing approaches.
Advantages:
 Because nearly all devices have sensors and a
process to track such biometric data, the system
can use them to validate the student's identification.
 Because subsystems operate concurrently, the
overall response is calculated using the speed of the
slowest detection algorithm. As a result, global
authentication time is shortened.
  Because no subsystem knows anything about any
other subsystem and because the matching points
are normalised using the QLS function, the system
can integrate standard algorithms.
III. METHODOLOGY
The persistent student identification method that is
suggested in this paper is described in this section. Three
biometric subsystems in the system can recognise touch,
voice, and face. Each delivers a pair of values: the first is the
distance determined by comparing the sensor model with the
purported pupil model, and the second is the subsystem's
level of distance-related dependability. The compatibility
scores of all subsystems are added and weighted according
to their confidence metrics to determine the overall
verification response. The global authentication response is
then compared to a threshold of acceptability; if it is lower,
the student keeps studying; if not, the system tightens access
restriction.
We can summarize the most typical features of the
proposed multi-biometric system as follows.
• Since nearly all devices have sensors and algorithms to
track such biometric data, the system can utilise these to
validate a student's identification.
• The execution time of the slowest detection method is
used to compute the overall response since subsystems
operate in parallel. As a result, global authentication time is
shortened.
• Because no subsystem knows anything about the others
and the matching points are normalised using the QLS
function, the system can integrate standard algorithms.
• The approach employs a model gallery of all student data
and SRR metric matching. The QLS function is used to
normalise reliability data.
• Point-level aggregation is used by the system to strike a
balance between the computational cost of the aggregation
procedure and the amount of data available for
authentication.
4.1. Biometric authentication subsystems
According to the kind of biometric, we discuss in the
sections that follow how each subsystem implements its
own modules.
4.1.1. Face-Based authentication subsystem
Almost all of the current gadgets, whether they are mobile
or desktop, come with an on-board camera. Since the
student is usually in front of the device during the reading
experience, we are able to easily take facial photos. The
subsystem randomly takes facial photographs during a
temporal frame. When the time frame expires, sample
discovery is carried out concurrently. We use a frame based
on the approaches for that aim. The subregion of the picture
containing the face is located using the Viola- Jones
technique.If the number of recovered faces isn't exactly one,
the subsystem responds with SRR1 = 1 and T1 = 1. If not, it
does a covert normalisation phase based on Active Shape
Model (ASM), one of the methods that strikes a compromise
between delicateness and processing speed. This is essential
because the student is plainly verified without requiring that
he or she constantly face the camera; as a result, disguise
variations regularly occur. Due to the risk of infidelity in our
setting, anti-spoofing countermeasures should be
implemented. We also utilise a matching method based on a
localised interpretation of the spatial correlation between the
claimed identity's face template and the face
inquiryanalyzed. This method leverages 3D geometric
invariants. If all of the matching scores for all of the
obtained inquiry samples are higher than a specified
threshold, thF, the subsystem comes to the conclusion that
there is only the claimed student in the inquiry samples. All
of the matched scores' normals are returned as a T1 value
that has been regularised in the range(,1) and transformed to
a distance measure in the same range by deducting 1 from it.
The matching scores from the facial exams are ordered, and
the point vector of the investigation with the corresponding
score that is closest to the norm is designated. Using this
point vector, the SRR1 measure is calculated. .
4.1.2. Voice-based authentication subsystem
A microphone is utilised for recording audio samples.
Nearly all living things have this detector, and they provide
methods to record data flowing from it. Because of the
nature of our issue, the subsystem can conduct textbook-
independent authentication as it is unable to predict the
student's decisions in advance. Using the audio performance
sensor, a clip's silence and other uninformative gaps are
eliminated.In order to reduce aliasing issues during the
analog-to-digital conversion and capture virtually all of the
energy noises produced by people, the voice input is tested
at a rate higher than 10.000 Hz. The subsystem uses the Mel
frequence Cepstral Portions (MFCCs), one of the most used
techniques in contemporary automated speech recognition
systems, to extract a parametric representation from the
speech waveform. On the Mel scale, the frequency bands
are inversely spaced, simulating the response of the mortal
audile system. For a better modelling phase and a better
representation of the sound qualities, the point birth is
performed on short timescales while assuming that a tiny
member of speech is much further stationary. The MFCCs
vector removed from the investigation is compared to the
database's template of the claimed identification. The
subsystem employs vector quantization codebooks for that
reason because of how simple they are to use and how
delicate they are. The procedure assigns acoustic vectors to
a limited number of spatial locations. Each region is a
cluster that, metaphorically speaking, is represented by its
centre, and each of them is connected to a single student.
Codebook refers to the collection of all the gadgets. The
subsystem creates a metaphor for each pupil during the
registration phase, and during the verification phase, it
calculates the separation between the claimed pupil's
metaphor and the auditory vector of the inquiry (a point in
the space of devices). The distance value is regularised in
the range and returned by the subsystem as the T2 value in
order to be harmonic.
4.1.3. Touch-based authentication subsystem
Because they strike a solid balance between usability and
security and because mobile devices are so widely used,
touch-based recognition systems are becoming more
prevalent in the literature. Modern mobile operating systems
offer common APIs that may be used to access raw data
about touch behaviour. Other libraries have been created to
detect touches on mobile webpages, most frequently in
JavaScript. because the two primary touch actions (tap and
swipe) may be used to ingest raw data. Furthermore, it just
needs information from the application, unlike other
significant algorithms. This expedites the training process
and gives easy access to updating the student model when
necessary. This method's quick registration (normally 11
gestures are adequate to train these classifiers) and excellent
accuracy make it more acceptable for our system's
requirements. The touch database that our system stores for
each learner is represented by the learned classifiers. During
the verification step, classifiers that have been previously
trained for the desired student are presented with a number
of consecutive user gestures. The average probability
derived by the two classifiers serves as a representation for
the T3 score. The value is first normalised to the range [0,
1], after which it is subtracted from 1 to get a distance in the
same range.
4.2. Subsystem response reliability
Each subsystem delivers (i) a match score and (ii) an
associated trust level in the authentication response. Better
performance is obtained using a dependability measure that
takes into account the context in which the match scores are
computed rather than the calibre of the input data. For a
gallery-dependent recognition system, the authors
established a biometric-independent trustability function.
They view the ordered list of identities produced by the
identification process as a cloud; the more unreliable the
response, the closer the score is to the first identity returned.
This idea may be modelled using the density ratio. In our
presentation, each subsystem implements a different variant
of this concept to manage the computation of score
dependability. Because each subsystem contains a gallery of
all student patterns, the system employs the candidate
pattern—that is, the first identity returned in each
identification case—as the original sample that is unique,
while the other patterns are used as fake patterns. This is
how the concept is put out. If a student sk requests a sensor
pi with a registered model gik and an authentication
subsystem Ai with a cheating option Gi, the density ratio I
of pi at Ai is defined as:
where r is the radius. Following the calculation of the value
i, more processes are required to arrive at the survey's SRR
value, or the SRR. using the density ratio i as a trustworthy
yardstick. The QLS function normalises the outcome to the
range [0, 1]. By doing this, we can account for the
significant variation in responses brought on by the
environment in which the data was gathered.
4.3. Fusion schema
Five biometric characteristics are merged at the point level
in the method suggested in this study in order to increase
authentication performance. This is generally regarded as
the optimum balance between the intricacy of the fusion
process and the quantity of information available. Each
subsystem in our system gives back a value pair. The first is
the distance in the range [0, 1], which comes from
comparing the sensor model with the necessary doll model.
The second shows the degree of confidence a specific
subsystem score has in the range [0, 1]. while no
information is received for the relevant biometric, the
confidence level is taken to be 0, allowing the associated
match point to be ignored while figuring out the overall
answer. It has been shown that in order to have a better
recognition result, the confidence level connected with the
response should be measured against a larger distance,
which often indicates that the user is not who he claims to
be. Even if the distance is minimal, the same idea still holds
true. The SRR measurements generated by the subsystems
are employed in our system's composition strategy to weight
the match points. We can specifically pinpoint five separate
trust values, namely SRR1 for face, SRR2 for voice, and
SRR3 for touch. To get a weighted total equivalent to the
global distance the system created, they are employed as
weights. The weights must add up to 1 for the outcome to be
consistent. The SRR values are averaged to their total value.
Furthermore, there are five reaction points: T1 for face, T2
for voice, T3 for touch, T for mouse, and T for keystroke.
By extending the formula from [1], the following results are
obtained for the total system core T:
The system compares the global authentication answer to a
predetermined acceptability level; if it is lower, the student
can continue their studies; otherwise, the system tightens
access restriction.
4.4. Integration in e-learning platforms
The integration of the multi-biometric system discussed in
this study into an e-learning platform is explained in this
section. And we demonstrate the distribution of the
components on both the client and server sides. defines their
relationship; We present and describe the idea of a temporal
authentication window since the integration approach poses
the question of how much data must be collected before
detection starts. We provide global reliability metrics that
relate to the system's capacity to recognise a specific student
during a specific kind of interaction with a specific kind of
equipment.
Fig. 2. An illustration of using temporal windows for
4.4.1. Integration methodology
biometric identification.
The integration process The administration module must be
flexibility in system administration and light client device
integrated into the client side of the e-learning platform's
workload.
web/mobile client. An e-learning platform backend and a
multi-biometric system are both present on the server side.
4.4.2. Temporal windowing of the authentication process
The multibiometric system operating on the server and the
client of the e-learning platform communicate with each
Current biometric systems often accomplish continuous
other through the administration module. It is in charge of
authentication by quickly acquiring and instantaneously
gathering raw data for every biometric feature and
identifying a new sensor (such a touch gesture or face
transmitting the information to various biometric systems.
picture). Due to (i) the computational burden of executing
Additionally, it manages the multi-biometric system's global
the feature extraction, matching, and merging stages each
authentication response. No dependencies are required
time a survey is gathered, and (ii) the reduction in the
between our system and the backend of the e-learning
quantity of information available for biometric
platform on the server. The multi-biometric system gets the
identification, this is rather challenging for our system.
initial input, conducts identification, and then sends the
cycle, particularly for behavioural biometrics, which need
management module a global authentication answer. We
information gathered over time for better matching, and (iii)
chose not to use the complete multibiometric system on the
instability and limited effect of the fusion phase as a result
client side to obtain the data, as a reader points out.
of issues at the second point. Our multi-biometric system
employs timed authentication windows in an effort to reduce
them. In the management module, the initial data is
collected throughout a series of fixed-duration time frames.
The raw data gathered during this time frame is transferred
to numerous biometric systems for identification once the
time window has passed. The management module begins
gathering data for the next time range at the same time.
The management module replies appropriately after
receiving an authentication response from the multi-
biometric system, enabling the student to resume their
studies or remove access restrictions. The multibiometric
system can use the data gathered for a particular window
before sending the data acquired for the next window if the
product of the times in the first and second points is less
than or equal to the size of the time window. The biggest
drawback of this strategy is that from the moment the
window expires until the global authentication answer is
Fig. 1. Integration plans between our system and an e- received, the cheater can communicate with the e-learning
learning platform. platform.

5.1 Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)

A. Introduction to CNN

A deep learning system specifically created to work with

pictures and videos is known as a convolutional neural
network. It uses photos as inputs to extract and learn image
features, then uses those learnt features to categorise the
images.
The visual cortex, one component of the human brain,
served as the model for this programme. The area of the
human brain in charge of analysing visual data from the
environment is known as the visual cortex. It includes a
number of levels, and each layer serves a different purpose,
such as extracting different information from images or
other visuals. Once all the information from the various
layers has been merged, the picture or visual may then be
analysed or classed.
A typical CNN model appears like follows:
 Input layer
 Convolution layer + Activation function
 Pooling layer
 Fully Connected Layer
1) INPUT LAYER
This is our input image, as the name implies, and it might be
either RGB or grayscale. Pixels in each picture range from 0
to 255. Prior to submitting them to the model, we must
normalise them, or transform the range from 0 to 1.
An example of an input picture containing three channels, or
RGB and pixel values, is shown below.
2) CONVOLUTION LAYER
A convolutional layer applies a filter to our input image in
order to extract or recognise its characteristics. Multiple
applications of the technique result in the creation of a
feature map that aids in the classification of the input
picture. Let's use an example to better grasp this. We create
a 2D input picture with regularised pixels for simplicity's
sake.
In the image above, we used a 3x3 filter to highlight specific
elements on an input image that was 6x6 in size. In this
example, we've just used one filter, but in reality, many of
these kinds of filters are used to extract information from
images.
We obtain a 4*4 point chart with some information on the
input picture as a result of applying the algorithm to the
image. Such point charts are frequently produced in
operational settings.
Let's look at some of the calculations used to create the
point chart in the image above.
As seen in the figure above, the first phase involves adding
sludge to the green stressed area of the image, multiplying
the image's pixel values by the filter values (represented by
the lines in the image), and adding the results to obtain the
final value. The sludge is modified by one column in the
following phase, as seen in the image below. A step is a leap
to the following column or row. In this example, we take
step 1, which implies we move one column.
This is how a sludge with a stride of one moves through the
entire picture.

3) Pooling Layer

The pooling layer, which is designed to decrease the

dimensionality of the feature map and preserve crucial
details or characteristics of the input picture, is applied after
the complexity layer. This speeds up calculation time. By
using a fleck, one may produce a reduced resolution
interpretation of the input that yet preserves significant or
substantial portions of the original image. Maximum
Pooling and Average Pooling are the two most popular
forms of pooling. How Max Pooling functions is seen in the
graphic below. Applying the join using the function chart
from the previous example. Here, step 2 and a merging layer
of size 2*2 are applied.

4) Fully Connected Layer

We've used the point birth method up until this point; the
bracket component is next. The input picture is classified
into a marker using the Fully connected subcaste (as in
ANN). This subcaste links the data that was removed from
the previous method (i.e., the complication subcaste and
Pooling layers) to the affair subcaste, which in turn Fig. 6.1.1, 6.1.2 & 6.1.3 The reference architecture of the
categorises the input into the requested marker. proposed multi-biometric system.
In the figure below, which is being presented, you can see
the entire CNN model process. V. RESULT AND ANALYSIS

In this research, we introduced and discussed a multi-

biometric system for the continuous and transparent
authentication of students in e-learning platforms. Making
the system compatible with the broadest range of potential
biases and learning conditioning was one of the key goals.
The technology recognises scholars based on the
commodities they are (presence) and do (commerce) by
combining the five biometric qualities. Additionally, as our
method doesn't exhibit new bias or unambiguous behaviour,
it is transparent from the standpoint of the student. This has
a strong chance of putting our method forward as a
workable outcome to certify that the certified student is the
IV. SYSTEM DESIGN one who actually conducts the literacy conditioning.

6.1 Architecture Diagram

 online assessment systems in the future. However, since
students are the ones who utilise online assessment systems,
it's critical to comprehend academics' perspectives on how
these tools represent students and advance their literacy.
Future studies might therefore examine how online grading
systems affect other academic variables.
VIII. REFERENCE

[1] K.M. Apampa, G. Wills, D. Argles, Towards security

goals in summative e-assessment security, in: the
Proceedings of the International Conference for Internet
VI. CONCLUSION Technology and Secured Transactions, IEEE, 2009, pp. 1–5.
[2] J. Miguel, S. Caballé, F. Xhafa, J. Prieto, Security in an
online website learning assessments and protocols, World
We chose a parallel architecture and score level fusion for
Wide Web(www) 18 (6) (2015) 1655 to 1676 Springer.
our system since they offer both speed and accuracy. Unlike
[3] X. Li, K.M. Chang, Y. Yuan, A. Hauptmann, Massive
many cutting-edge systems, this dynamic structure may
open online proctor: protecting the credibility of MOOCs
change depending on the device being used and the sort of
certificates, in: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on
contact being made with it. To identify the student, at least
Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social
one behavioural biometric and one physiological biometric
Computing, ACM, 2015, pp. 1129–1137.
are integrated. We employ the idea of a temporal
[4] Y. Atoum, L. Chen, A.X. Liu, S.D. Hsu, X. Liu,
authentication window to control such a combination; the
Automated online exam proctoring, IEEE Trans.
system collects input during the window before beginning
Multimedia 99 (2016).
the recognition. Every time a new sample is collected, it
[5] A. Moini, A.M. Madni, Leveraging biometric for online
does not go through a recognition cycle. Since the output is
users authentications in online user learning systems: a
very standardised, each subsystem may also be represented
systems perspective, IEEE System. J. 3 (4) (2009) 469–476
using other commercially available techniques. Each of
IEEE.
them also produces a matching score and a reliability
[6] S. Asha, C. Chellappan, Authentication of e-learners
measure that is used to assess the subsystem's contribution
using multi-modal bio metrices technologies, in the
to the overall answer. By doing this, we can also determine
Proceedings of the International Symposium on Bio metrics
which student's equipment is the most accurate in
and Security Technologies, IEEE, 2008, pp. 1–6.
recognising him or her.
[7] E.G. Agulla, E.A. Rúa, J.L.A. Castro, D.G. Jiménez,
L.A. Rifón, Multimodal biometrics-based student attendance
The first comparison with the various solutions in use
measurement in learning management systems, in: the
motivates us to conduct more investigation. In addition to
Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Symposium on
investigating its incorporation into online proctoring
Multimedia (ISM), IEEE, 2009, pp. 699–704.
systems with cheating detectors, we intend to test our
[8] E. Flior, K. Kowalski, Continuous bio metrics of user
technology in actual circumstances. By doing this, we could
authentication in an online exams systems, describing that in
vouch for the fact that (i) the students are who they say they
the Proceedings with 7th International Conference on
are, and (ii) they take tests honestly. Even though we use the
Information Technologies, 2010, pp. 488–492.
e-learning environment as a case study, additional online
[9] A. Morales, J. Fierrez, Keystroke Biometrics for
platforms are now included in the possible applications of
Student Authentication systems: A Case Study is describing
our authentication system.
that in the Proceedings of the ACM Conferences on
VII. FUTURE SCOPE Innovations and Technologies in the Computer Science
Education system, 2015, p. 337.
[10] L.D. Spano, G. Fenu, IceTT: a responsive visualization
In this study, online assessment systems are looked at as a
for task models, in: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGCHI
tool, and the findings (characteristics of online assessment
Symposium on Engineering Interactive computing systems,
systems) can help interpreters, decision-makers,
ACM, 2014, pp. 197–200.
experimenters, and system developers choose and/or build