Search

The forensic comparison of glass aims to compare a glass sample of an unknown source with a control glass sample of a known source. In this work, we use multi-elemental features from Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma with Mass Spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) to compute a likelihood ratio. This calculation is a complex procedure that generally requires a probabilistic model including the within-source and between-source variabilities of the features. Assuming the within-source variability to be normally distributed is a practical premise with the available data. However, the between-source variability is generally assumed to follow a much more complex distribution, typically described with a kernel density function. In this work, instead of modeling distributions with complex densities, we propose the use of simpler models and the introduction of a data pre-processing step consisting on the Gaussianization of the glass features. In this context, to obtain a better fit of the features with the Gaussian model assumptions, we explore the use of different normalization techniques of the LA-ICP-MS glass features, namely marginal Gaussianization based on histogram matching, marginal Gaussianization based on Yeo-Johnson transformation and a more complex joint Gaussianization using normalizing flows. We report an improvement in the performance of the Likelihood Ratios computed with the previously Gaussianized feature vectors, particularly relevant in their calibration, which implies a more reliable forensic glass comparison. • Feature-based models yield badly calibrated LRs in forensic glass comparison. • Different Gaussianizations schemes over the between-source and within-source variabilities have been analyzed. • A Gaussianization based on histogram matching is the most robust to dataset shifts. • The computation of LRs with Gaussianized features improves their calibration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Guideline proposes a protocol for the validation of forensic evaluation methods at the source level, using the Likelihood Ratio framework as defined within the Bayes' inference model. In the context of the inference of identity of source, the Likelihood Ratio is used to evaluate the strength of the evidence for a trace specimen, e.g. a fingermark, and a reference specimen, e.g. a fingerprint, to originate from common or different sources. Some theoretical aspects of probabilities necessary for this Guideline were discussed prior to its elaboration, which started after a workshop of forensic researchers and practitioners involved in this topic. In the workshop, the following questions were addressed: "which aspects of a forensic evaluation scenario need to be validated?", "what is the role of the LR as part of a decision process?" and "how to deal with uncertainty in the LR calculation?". The questions: "what to validate?" focuses on the validation methods and criteria and "how to validate?" deals with the implementation of the validation protocol. Answers to these questions were deemed necessary with several objectives. First, concepts typical for validation standards [1], such as performance characteristics, performance metrics and validation criteria, will be adapted or applied by analogy to the LR framework. Second, a validation strategy will be defined. Third, validation methods will be described. Finally, a validation protocol and an example of validation report will be proposed, which can be applied to the forensic fields developing and validating LR methods for the evaluation of the strength of evidence at source level under the following propositions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measuring the performance of forensic evaluation methods that compute likelihood ratios (LRs) is relevant for both the development and the validation of such methods. A framework of performance characteristics categorized as primary and secondary is introduced in this study to help achieve such development and validation. Ground-truth labelled fingerprint data is used to assess the performance of an example likelihood ratio method in terms of those performance characteristics. Discrimination, calibration, and especially the coherence of this LR method are assessed as a function of the quantity and quality of the trace fingerprint specimen. Assessment of the coherence revealed a weakness of the comparison algorithm in the computer-assisted likelihood ratio method used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Calculation of likelihood ratios (LR) in evidence evaluation still presents major challenges in many forensic disciplines: for instance, an incorrect selection of databases, a bad choice of statistical models, low quantity and bad quality of the evidence are factors that may lead to likelihood ratios supporting the wrong proposition in a given case. However, measuring performance of LR values is not straightforward, and adequate metrics should be defined and used. With this objective, in this work we describe the concept of calibration, a property of a set of LR values. We highlight that some desirable behavior of LR values happens if they are well calibrated. Moreover, we propose a tool for representing performance, the Empirical Cross-Entropy (ECE) plot, showing that it can explicitly measure calibration of LR values. We finally describe some examples using speech evidence, where the usefulness of ECE plots and the measurement of calibration is shown. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: More than just being a substrate, paper can also provide evidence for the provenance of documents. An earlier paper described a method to compare paper structure, based on the Fourier power spectra of light transmission images. Good results were obtained by using the 2D correlation of images derived from the power spectra as a similarity score, but the method was very computationally intensive. Different comparison algorithms are evaluated in this paper, using information theoretical criteria. An angular invariant algorithm turned out to be as effective as the original one but 4 orders of magnitude faster, making the use of much larger databases possible. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper reports an exhaustive analysis of the discriminative power of the different regions of the human face on various forensic scenarios. In practice, when forensic examiners compare two face images, they focus their attention not only on the overall similarity of the two faces. They carry out an exhaustive morphological comparison region by region (e.g., nose, mouth, eyebrows, etc.). In this scenario it is very important to know based on scientific methods to what extent each facial region can help in identifying a person. This knowledge obtained using quantitative and statical methods on given populations can then be used by the examiner to support or tune his observations. In order to generate such scientific knowledge useful for the expert, several methodologies are compared, such as manual and automatic facial landmarks extraction, different facial regions extractors, and various distances between the subject and the acquisition camera. Also, three scenarios of interest for forensics are considered comparing mugshot and Closed-Circuit TeleVision (CCTV) face images using MORPH and SCface databases. One of the findings is that depending of the acquisition distances, the discriminative power of the facial regions change, having in some cases better performance than the full face [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]