Volume 55, Issue 2 pp. 371-384

A Two-Level Model for Evidence Evaluation in the Presence of Zeros*

Grzegorz Zadora Ph.D.

Grzegorz Zadora Ph.D.

Institute of Forensic Research, Westerplatte 9, PL-31-033 Krakow, Poland.

Search for more papers by this author
Tereza Neocleous Ph.D.

Tereza Neocleous Ph.D.

Department of Statistics, University of Glasgow, 15 University Gardens, Glasgow G12 8QW, U.K.

Search for more papers by this author
Colin Aitken Ph.D.

Colin Aitken Ph.D.

School of Mathematics and The Joseph Bell Centre for Forensic Statistics and Legal Reasoning, The King’s Buildings, The University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JZ, U.K.

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 01 March 2010
Citations: 25
Additional information and reprint requests:
Grzegorz Zadora, Ph.D.
Institute of Forensic Research
Westerplatte 9
31-033 Krakow
Poland
E-mail: [email protected]
*

The research was financially supported by the State Committee for Scientific Research, Poland, within project no. 0T00C02829 and by U.K. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council grant EP/C532627/1.

Abstract

Abstract: Likelihood ratios (LRs) provide a natural way of computing the value of evidence under competing propositions. We propose LR models for classification and comparison that extend the ideas of Aitken, Zadora, and Lucy and Aitken and Lucy to include consideration of zeros. Instead of substituting zeros by a small value, we view the presence of zeros as informative and model it using Bernoulli distributions. The proposed models are used for evaluation of forensic glass (comparison and classification problem) and paint data (comparison problem). Two hundred and sixty-four glass samples were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy, coupled with an energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer method and 36 acrylic topcoat paint samples by pyrolysis gas chromatography hyphened with mass spectrometer method. The proposed LR model gave very satisfactory results for the glass comparison problem and for most of the classification tasks for glass. Results of comparison of paints were also highly satisfactory, with only 3.0% false positive answers and 2.8% false negative answers.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.