Letter to the EditorA comment on the PCAST report: Skip the “match”/“non-match” stage
Section snippets
Acknowledgments
This work was funded in-part by a fellowship awarded to Morrison by the Simons Foundation. Morrison, Balding, Dawid, Aitken, Robertson, Pope, Neil, Martire, Gill, Jamieson, de Zoete, and Caliebe would like to thank the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences for its hospitality during the program Probability and Statistics in Forensic Science which was supported by EPSRC Grant Number EP/K032208/1. All opinions expressed are those of the authors/signatories and do not necessarily
References (16)
Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-comparison Methods
(2016)- et al.
Statistical inference in crime investigations using deoxyribonucleic acid profiling
Appl. Stat.
(1992) - et al.
An illustration of efficient statistical methods for RFLP analysis in forensic science
Am. J. Hum. Genet.
(1993) - et al.
Statistics and the Evaluation of Forensic Evidence for Forensic Scientist
(2004) - et al.
Interpreting DNA evidence: a review
Int. Stat. Rev.
(2003) Statistics in forensic science. Part II. An aid to evaluation of evidence
Probl. Forensic Sci.
(2006)Inferences using DNA profiling in forensic identification and paternity cases
Stat. Sci.
(1991)- et al.
Forensic Interpretation of Glass Evidence
(2000)
Cited by (25)
The evidential strength of a combination of corresponding class features in tire examination
2022, Forensic Science InternationalCitation Excerpt :Thus, for our case this would entail reporting the expert-specific error rate of a black-box study for a series of tire comparison cases. We agree with Morrison et al. [42] who criticize this approach in general. Also, we think that general error rates are not very relevant in a specific case [43].
Forensic Voice Comparison: Overview
2022, Encyclopedia of Forensic Sciences: Volume 1-4, Third EditionAdvancing a paradigm shift in evaluation of forensic evidence: The rise of forensic data science
2022, Forensic Science International: SynergyThe strange persistence of (source) “identification” claims in forensic literature through descriptivism, diagnosticism and machinism
2022, Forensic Science International: SynergyCitation Excerpt :The short answer is: almost everything, which is why these terms should have no place in forensic science,22 despite the fact that they are prominently used throughout official documents, such as the PCAST Report [77]. Longer answers have previously been given by other authors [47,72], making it all the more exasperating that “match”-terminology continues to be highly prevalent in current forensic science literature. A main problem of the term “match” is that it is used to denote two fundamentally different targets: observations on the one hand, and ground truth on the other hand.
The biasing impact of irrelevant contextual information on forensic odontology radiograph matching decisions
2021, Forensic Science InternationalCalculation of likelihood ratios for inference of biological sex from human skeletal remains
2021, Forensic Science International: Synergy