Literature DB >> 12051330

Interpreting small quantities of DNA: the hierarchy of propositions and the use of Bayesian networks.

Ian W Evett1, Peter D Gill, Graham Jackson, Jonathan Whitaker, Christophe Champod.   

Abstract

The dramatic increase in the sensitivity of DNA profiling systems that has occurred over recent years has led to the need to address a wider range of interpretational problems in forensic science. The issues surrounding questions of the kind "whose DNA is this?" have been the subject of considerable controversy but now it is clear that the emphasis is shifting to questions of the kind "how did this DNA get here?" Such issues are discussed in this paper and new insights are provided by two particular recent developments. First, the notion of the "hierarchy of propositions" that has arisen from a project called Case Assessment and Interpretation (CAI) that has been running in the British Forensic Science Service (FSS). Second, a technique for drawing inferences in the face of many interacting considerations, known as "Bayesian networks"--or "Bayes' nets" for short--that has been the subject of an earlier paper in this journal (1). The discussion is carried out by means of case studies, based on actual cases. It is clear that, whereas the inference in relation to the source of the DNA in a crime sample might be overwhelmingly strong, the inference in relation to the propositions that a jury must consider relating to the identity of the actual offender may be much more tentative.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12051330

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Forensic Sci        ISSN: 0022-1198            Impact factor:   1.832


  10 in total

1.  Object-oriented Bayesian networks for paternity cases with allelic dependencies.

Authors:  Amanda B Hepler; Bruce S Weir
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int Genet       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 4.882

2.  A response to "Likelihood ratio as weight of evidence: A closer look" by Lund and Iyer.

Authors:  Simone Gittelson; Charles E H Berger; Graham Jackson; Ian W Evett; Christophe Champod; Bernard Robertson; James M Curran; Duncan Taylor; Bruce S Weir; Michael D Coble; John S Buckleton
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 2.395

3.  Reduced reaction volumes and increased Taq DNA polymerase concentration improve STR profiling outcomes from a real-world low template DNA source: telogen hairs.

Authors:  Dennis McNevin; Janette Edson; James Robertson; Jeremy J Austin
Journal:  Forensic Sci Med Pathol       Date:  2015-05-22       Impact factor: 2.007

Review 4.  A Logical Framework for Forensic DNA Interpretation.

Authors:  Tacha Hicks; John Buckleton; Vincent Castella; Ian Evett; Graham Jackson
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 4.141

5.  Bayes and the Law.

Authors:  Norman Fenton; Martin Neil; Daniel Berger
Journal:  Annu Rev Stat Appl       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 5.810

6.  The impact of commercialization on the evaluation of DNA evidence.

Authors:  Graham Jackson
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2013-11-06       Impact factor: 4.599

7.  The Importance of Critically Examining the Level of Propositions When Evaluating Forensic DNA Results.

Authors:  Alex Biedermann; Tacha Hicks
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2016-02-08       Impact factor: 4.599

Review 8.  Evaluation of Forensic DNA Traces When Propositions of Interest Relate to Activities: Analysis and Discussion of Recurrent Concerns.

Authors:  Alex Biedermann; Christophe Champod; Graham Jackson; Peter Gill; Duncan Taylor; John Butler; Niels Morling; Tacha Hicks; Joelle Vuille; Franco Taroni
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2016-12-12       Impact factor: 4.599

9.  A preliminary approach to quantifying the overall environmental risks posed by development projects during environmental impact assessment.

Authors:  Sam Nicol; Iadine Chadès
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-07       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Using Bayesian networks to guide the assessment of new evidence in an appeal case.

Authors:  Nadine M Smit; David A Lagnado; Ruth M Morgan; Norman E Fenton
Journal:  Crime Sci       Date:  2016-05-25
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.