gbanyan
6946baa096
Codex gpt-5.4 round-5 (codex_review_gpt54_v3_5.md) verdict was Minor Revision - all v3.4 round-4 PARTIAL/UNFIXED items now confirmed RESOLVED, including line-by-line recomputation of Table XI z/p matching the manuscript values. This commit cleans the remaining quick-win items: Table IX numerical sync to Script 24 authoritative values - Five count corrections: cos>0.837 (60,405->60,408), cos>0.945 (57,131/94.52% -> 56,836/94.02%, was 295 sigs / 0.50 pp off), cos>0.973 (48,910/80.91% -> 48,028/79.45%, was 882 sigs / 1.46 pp off), cos>0.95 (55,916->55,922), dh<=8 (57,521->57,527), dh<=15 (60,345->60,348), dual (54,373->54,370). - Threshold label cos>0.941 -> cos>0.9407 (use exact calib-fold P5 rather than rounded value). - "dHash_indep <= 5 (calib-fold median-adjacent)" relabeled to "(whole-sample upper-tail of mode)" to match what III-L explains. - Added "(operational dual)" / "(style-consistency boundary)" labels for unambiguous mapping into III-L category definitions. - Removed circularity-language footnote inside the table comment. Circularity overclaim removed paper-wide - Methodology III-K (Section 3 anchor): "we break the resulting circularity" -> "we make the within-Firm-A sampling variance visible". - Results IV-G.2 subsection title: "(breaks calibration-validation circularity)" -> "(within-Firm-A sampling variance disclosure)". - Combined with the v3.5 Abstract / Conclusion edits, no surviving use of circular* anywhere in the paper. export_v3.py title page now single-anonymized - Removed "[Authors removed for double-blind review]" placeholder (IEEE Access uses single-anonymized review). - Replaced with explicit "[AUTHOR NAMES - fill in before submission]" + affiliation placeholder so the requirement is unmissable. - Subtitle now reads "single-anonymized review". III-G stale "cosine-conditional dHash" sentence removed - After the v3.5 III-L rewrite to dh_indep, the sentence at Methodology L131 referencing "cosine-conditional dHash used as a diagnostic elsewhere" no longer described any current paper usage. - Replaced with a positive statement that dh_indep is the dHash statistic used throughout the operational classifier and all reported capture-rate analyses. Abstract trimmed 247 -> 242 words for IEEE 250-word safety margin - "an end-to-end pipeline" -> "a pipeline"; "Unlike signature forgery" -> "Unlike forgery"; "we report" passive recast; small conjunction trims. Outstanding items deferred (require user decision / larger scope): - BD/McCrary either substantiate (Z/p table + bin-width robustness) or demote to supplementary diagnostic. - Visual-inspection protocol disclosure (sample size, rater count, blinding, adjudication rule). - Reproducibility appendix (VLM prompt, HSV thresholds, seeds, EM init / stopping / boundary handling). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
8 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
8 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
# Abstract
|
|
|
|
<!-- IEEE Access target: <= 250 words, single paragraph -->
|
|
|
|
Regulations require Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) to attest to each audit report by affixing a signature. Digitization makes reusing a stored signature image across reports trivial---through administrative stamping or firm-level electronic signing---potentially undermining individualized attestation. Unlike forgery, *non-hand-signed* reproduction reuses the legitimate signer's own stored image, making it visually invisible to report users and infeasible to audit at scale manually. We present a pipeline integrating a Vision-Language Model for signature-page identification, YOLOv11 for signature detection, and ResNet-50 for feature extraction, followed by dual-descriptor verification combining cosine similarity and difference hashing. For threshold determination we apply three methodologically distinct estimators---kernel-density antimode with a Hartigan unimodality test, Burgstahler-Dichev/McCrary discontinuity, and EM-fitted Beta mixtures with a logit-Gaussian robustness check---at both the signature and accountant levels. Applied to 90,282 audit reports filed in Taiwan over 2013-2023 (182,328 signatures from 758 CPAs), the methods reveal a level asymmetry: signature-level similarity is a continuous quality spectrum that no two-component mixture separates, while accountant-level aggregates cluster into three groups with the antimode and two mixture estimators converging within $\sim$0.006 at cosine $\approx 0.975$. A major Big-4 firm is used as a *replication-dominated* (not pure) calibration anchor, with visual inspection and accountant-level mixture evidence supporting majority non-hand-signing and a minority of hand-signers; capture rates on both 70/30 calibration and held-out folds are reported with Wilson 95% intervals to make fold-level variance visible. Validation against 310 byte-identical positives and a $\sim$50,000-pair inter-CPA negative anchor yields FAR $\leq$ 0.001 at all accountant-level thresholds.
|
|
|
|
<!-- Target word count: 240 -->
|