Evolutionary Computation of Facial Composites for Suspect Identification in Forensic Sciences

2021 ◽  
pp. 449-456
Author(s):  
Vijay A. Kanade
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Computation ◽  
Forensic Sciences ◽  
Suspect Identification

Detection of exogenous substances in latent fingermarks by silver-assisted LDI imaging MS: perspectives in forensic sciences

The Analyst ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 143 (15) ◽  
pp. 3586-3594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nidia Lauzon ◽  
Pierre Chaurand
Keyword(s):  
Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Imaging Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Forensic Sciences ◽  
Forensic Evidence ◽  
Modern Imaging ◽  
Suspect Identification ◽  
Mass Spectrometry Technology ◽  
Molecular Information ◽  
Imaging Ms ◽  
Exogenous Substances

For over one hundred years, the fingerprint has reigned as one of the most trusted pieces of forensic evidence for suspect identification. Today, modern imaging mass spectrometry technology allows to correlate molecular information to the fingerprint giving us valuable insights into a suspect lifestyle and behaviour.

Architecture for High Speed Evolutionary Computation

2003 ◽  
Vol 123 (4) ◽  
pp. 723-733
Author(s):  
Masaya Yoshikawa ◽  
Tetuya Imai ◽  
Tomoyuki Kodama ◽  
Hironori Yamauchi ◽  
Hidekazu Terai
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Computation ◽  
High Speed

Forensic science evidence: Naive estimates of false positive error rates and reliability

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristy Martire ◽  
Agnes Bali ◽  
Kaye Ballantyne ◽  
Gary Edmond ◽  
Richard Kemp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
False Positive ◽  
Error Rates ◽  
Forensic Sciences ◽  
Positive Error ◽  
False Positive Error ◽  
Reliability Estimates ◽  
Positive Report ◽  
Science Evidence ◽  
Science Disciplines

We do not know how often false positive reports are made in a range of forensic science disciplines. In the absence of this information it is important to understand the naive beliefs held by potential jurors about forensic science evidence reliability. It is these beliefs that will shape evaluations at trial. This descriptive study adds to our knowledge about naive beliefs by: 1) measuring jury-eligible (lay) perceptions of reliability for the largest range of forensic science disciplines to date, over three waves of data collection between 2011 and 2016 (n = 674); 2) calibrating reliability ratings with false positive report estimates; and 3) comparing lay reliability estimates with those of an opportunity sample of forensic practitioners (n = 53). Overall the data suggest that both jury-eligible participants and practitioners consider forensic evidence highly reliable. When compared to best or plausible estimates of reliability and error in the forensic sciences these views appear to overestimate reliability and underestimate the frequency of false positive errors. This result highlights the importance of collecting and disseminating empirically derived estimates of false positive error rates to ensure that practitioners and potential jurors have a realistic impression of the value of forensic science evidence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document