arXiv (Cornell University),
Journal Year:
2021,
Volume and Issue:
unknown
Published: Oct. 31, 2021
Forensic
examination
of
evidence
like
firearms
and
toolmarks,
traditionally
involves
a
visual
therefore
subjective
assessment
similarity
two
questioned
items.
Statistical
models
are
used
to
overcome
this
subjectivity
allow
specification
error
rates.
These
generally
quite
complex
produce
abstract
results
at
different
levels
the
analysis.
Presenting
such
metrics
complicated
examiners
is
challenging,
as
do
not
have
substantial
statistical
training
accurately
interpret
results.
This
creates
distrust
in
modelling
lowers
rate
acceptance
more
objective
measures
that
discipline
large
striving
for.
We
present
an
inferential
framework
for
assessing
model
its
output.
The
designed
calibrate
trust
forensic
experts
by
bridging
gap
between
domain
specific
knowledge
predictive
results,
allowing
validate
claims
while
critically
Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
56(sup1), P. 197 - 200
Published: April 28, 2024
As
a
seasoned
forensic
scientist
and
practitioner
with
more
than
two
decades
of
experience
spanning
both
industry
research,
I
have
invested
considerable
time
in
reflecting
on
the
current
state
future
direction
science.
This
reflection,
fuelled
by
my
recent
participation
professional
conference
(The
23rd
Triennial
Meeting
International
Association
Forensic
Sciences
(IAFS)),
has
reinforced
perspective
industry's
advancement
critical
areas
requiring
attention
to
promote
positive
reform.
In
this
narrative,
articulate
insights
garnered
during
plenary
panel
session,
firmly
grounded
vision
for
field's
advancement.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
121(25)
Published: June 10, 2024
When
wires
are
cut,
the
tool
produces
striations
on
cut
surface;
as
in
other
forms
of
forensic
analysis,
these
striation
marks
used
to
connect
evidence
source
that
created
them.
Here,
we
argue
practice
comparing
two
wire
surfaces
introduces
complexities
not
present
better-investigated
examination
toolmarks
such
those
observed
bullets,
comparisons
inherently
require
multiple
distinct
comparisons,
increasing
expected
false
discovery
rate.
We
call
attention
comparison
problem
and
relate
it
situations
forensics
involve
database
searches.
People
vary
substantially
in
their
ability
to
visually
compare
or
‘match’
patterns
–
some
are
much
more
accurate
than
others.
This
is
a
varied
and
generalisable
the
general
population
for
example,
novices
who
excel
fingerprint-matching
also
firearms-matching.
Forensic
feature-comparison
examiners
this
task,
but
no
research
has
investigated
generalisability
of
skill.
The
extent
which
superiority
will
generalise
predict
related
tasks
unclear.
In
study,
we
perceptual
expertise
amongst
forensic
by
comparing
performance
other
within
outside
area
expertise.
We
recruited
85
experts
from
three
disciplines
(face,
fingerprint,
firearms)
asked
them
complete
four
different
visual
comparison
tasks:
faces,
fingerprints,
firearms,
novel
objects.
Examiners
displayed
domain-specific
expertise:
they
outperformed
domain
Yet
skill
generalised:
These
results
provide
key
insight
into
domain-general
contributions
examiners’
lends
still
leads
best
performance.
Cognitive Research Principles and Implications,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
9(1)
Published: Oct. 29, 2024
Abstract
Perceptual
expertise
is
typically
domain-specific
and
rarely
generalises
beyond
an
expert’s
domain
of
experience.
Forensic
feature-comparison
examiners
outperform
the
norm
in
visual
comparison,
but
emerging
research
suggests
that
they
show
advantages
on
other
similar
tasks
outside
their
expertise.
For
example,
fingerprint
not
only
novices
also
face
comparison.
Yet,
extent
to
which
skills
generalise
poorly
understood.
In
this
study,
we
investigated
generalisability
perceptual
amongst
forensic
by
comparing
performance
within
area
We
recruited
85
experts
from
three
disciplines
(face,
fingerprint,
firearms)
asked
them
complete
four
different
comparison
tasks:
faces,
fingerprints,
firearms,
novel-objects.
Examiners
displayed
expertise:
outperformed
some
skill
generalised:
However,
while
individual
differences
examiners’
experience
were
associated
with
a
novel
task,
related
expert
domain.
These
results
provide
key
insight
into
domain-general
contributions
lends
generalisable
tasks,
best
still
seen
Journal of Forensic Sciences,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
unknown
Published: Dec. 10, 2024
Abstract
The
inconclusive
category
in
forensics
reporting
is
the
appropriate
response
many
cases,
but
it
poses
challenges
estimating
an
“error
rate”.
We
discuss
use
of
a
class
information‐theoretic
measures
related
to
cross
entropy
as
alternative
set
metrics
that
allows
for
performance
evaluation
results
presented
using
multi‐category
scales.
This
paper
shows
how
this
metrics,
and
particular
log
likelihood
ratio
cost,
which
already
with
forensic
methods
machine
learning
communities,
can
be
readily
adapted
widely
used
multiple
conclusions
Bayesian
credible
intervals
on
these
estimated
numerical
methods.
application
published
test
shown.
It
demonstrated,
results,
reducing
number
categories
proficiency
from
five
or
six
three
increases
entropy,
indicating
higher
was
justified,
they
increased
level
agreement
ground
truth.
Law Probability and Risk,
Journal Year:
2024,
Volume and Issue:
23(1)
Published: Jan. 1, 2024
Abstract
Reviews
conducted
by
the
National
Academy
of
Sciences
(2009)
and
President’s
Council
Advisors
on
Science
Technology
(2016)
concluded
that
field
forensic
firearm
comparisons
has
not
been
demonstrated
to
be
scientifically
valid.
Scientific
validity
requires
adequately
designed
studies
examiner
performance
in
terms
accuracy,
repeatability,
reproducibility.
Researchers
have
performed
“black-box”
with
goal
estimating
these
measures.
As
statisticians
expertise
experimental
design,
we
a
literature
search
such
date
then
evaluated
design
statistical
analysis
methods
used
each
study.
Our
conclusion
is
all
our
methodological
flaws
are
so
grave
they
render
invalid,
is,
incapable
establishing
scientific
firearms
examination.
Notably,
error
rates
among
examiners,
both
collectively
individually,
remain
unknown.
Therefore,
statements
about
common
origin
bullets
or
cartridge
cases
based
examination
“individual”
characteristics
do
basis.
We
provide
some
recommendations
for
future
studies.
The
National
Institute
of
Justice
(NIJ)
and
the
Forensic
Technology
Center
Excellence,
an
NIJ
program
hosted
a
four-day
symposium,
January
11–14,
2022.
symposium
included
presentations
panel
discussions
on
topics
relevant
to
recent
advances
in
firearm
toolmark
examination
with
focus
future.
brought
together
685
criminal
justice
processionals
explore
implementation
three-dimensional
(3D)
imaging
technologies,
best
practices
for
forensic
evidence,
federal
initiatives,
gun
crime
intelligence,
black
box
studies
examination,
legal
challenges
admissibility
current
evidence
engineering
solutions
that
will
be
used
court
future,
Organization
Scientific
Area
Committee
(OSAC)
standards
reporting,
uniform
language
testimony
conclusion
scales.
provided
examples
how
agencies
implement
new
technologies
firearms
incorporate
statistics
add
weight
comparisons,
address
issues,
operationalize
intelligence
improve
public
safety
share
information
community.
also
platform
discuss
series
considerations
forensic,
law
enforcement,
greater
community
could
help
support
successful
national
transition
accelerate
adoption
examination.
