Informatic Opacity: Biometric Facial Recognition and the Aesthetics and Politics of Defacement

Confronting the rapidly increasing, worldwide reliance on biometric technologies to surveil, manage, and police human beings, my dissertation Informatic Opacity: Biometric Facial Recognition and the Aesthetics and Politics of Defacement charts a series of queer, feminist, and anti-racist concepts and artworks that favor opacity as a means of political struggle against surveillance and capture technologies in the 21st century. Utilizing biometric facial recognition as a paradigmatic example, I argue that today's surveillance requires persons to be informatically visible in order to control them, and such visibility relies upon the production of technical standardizations of identification to operate globally, which most vehemently impact non- normative, minoritarian populations. Thus, as biometric technologies turn exposures of the face into sites of governance, activists and artists strive to make the face biometrically illegible and refuse the political recognition biometrics promises through acts of masking, escape, and imperceptibility. Although I specifically describe tactics of making the face unrecognizable as "defacement," I broadly theorize refusals to visually cohere to digital surveillance and capture technologies' gaze as "informatic opacity," an aesthetic-political theory and practice of anti- normativity at a global, technical scale whose goal is maintaining the autonomous determination of alterity and difference by evading the quantification, standardization, and regulation of identity imposed by biometrics and the state. My dissertation also features two artworks: Facial Weaponization Suite, a series of masks and public actions, and Face Cages, a critical, dystopic installation that investigates the abstract violence of biometric facial diagramming and analysis. I develop an interdisciplinary, practice-based method that pulls from contemporary art and aesthetic theory, media theory and surveillance studies, political and continental philosophy, queer and feminist theory, transgender studies, postcolonial theory, and critical race studies.

Evaluating marker-guided treatment selection strategies

© 2014, The International Biometric Society.A potential venue to improve healthcare efficiency is to effectively tailor individualized treatment strategies by incorporating patient level predictor information such as environmental exposure, biological, and genetic marker measurements. Many useful statistical methods for deriving individualized treatment rules (ITR) have become available in recent years. Prior to adopting any ITR in clinical practice, it is crucial to evaluate its value in improving patient outcomes. Existing methods for quantifying such values mainly consider either a single marker or semi-parametric methods that are subject to bias under model misspecification. In this article, we consider a general setting with multiple markers and propose a two-step robust method to derive ITRs and evaluate their values. We also propose procedures for comparing different ITRs, which can be used to quantify the incremental value of new markers in improving treatment selection. While working models are used in step I to approximate optimal ITRs, we add a layer of calibration to guard against model misspecification and further assess the value of the ITR non-parametrically, which ensures the validity of the inference. To account for the sampling variability of the estimated rules and their corresponding values, we propose a resampling procedure to provide valid confidence intervals for the value functions as well as for the incremental value of new markers for treatment selection. Our proposals are examined through extensive simulation studies and illustrated with the data from a clinical trial that studies the effects of two drug combinations on HIV-1 infected patients.