A comment on the PCAST report: Skip the "match"/"non-match" stage.
Forensic Sci Int
; 272: e7-e9, 2017 Mar.
Article
en En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-27817943
ABSTRACT
This letter comments on the report "Forensic science in criminal courts Ensuring scientific validity of feature-comparison methods" recently released by the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). The report advocates a procedure for evaluation of forensic evidence that is a two-stage procedure in which the first stage is "match"/"non-match" and the second stage is empirical assessment of sensitivity (correct acceptance) and false alarm (false acceptance) rates. Almost always, quantitative data from feature-comparison methods are continuously-valued and have within-source variability. We explain why a two-stage procedure is not appropriate for this type of data, and recommend use of statistical procedures which are appropriate.
Texto completo:
1
Bases de datos:
MEDLINE
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Forensic Sci Int
Año:
2017
Tipo del documento:
Article