Inference of identity in forensic speaker recognition

Speech Communication

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 193-203

  Champod, Christophe ^a   Meuwly, Didier ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ERROR ANALYSIS; SPEECH ANALYSIS;

FORENSIC SPEAKER RECOGNITION;

SPEECH RECOGNITION;

EID: 0033738981     PISSN: 01676393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6393(99)00078-3     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. AFTE Committee, 1992. Theory of identification range of striæ comparison reports and modified glossary definition an AFTE criteria for identification committee report. AFTE Journal 24, 336.
2. Aitken, C.G.G., 1995. Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists. Wiley, Chichester, UK.
3. Aitken, C.G.G., Stoney, D.A., 1991. The Use of Statistics in Forensic Science. Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UK.
4. Anon Resolution VII amended. Identification News. 30:1980;3.
5. Balding, D.J., Donnelly, P., 1994. The prosecutor's fallacy and DNA evidence. Criminal Law Review, 711-721.
6. Berry, D.A., 1991. Probability of Paternity. In: Aitken, C.G.G., Stoney, D.A. (Eds.), The Use of Statistics in Forensic Science. Ellis Horwood, New York, pp. 150-156.
7. Bodziak, W.J., 1990. Footwear Impression Evidence. Elsevier, New York.
8. Broeders, A.P.A., 1995. The role of automatic speaker recognition techniques in forensic investigations. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of Phonetic Science. Vol. 3, pp. 154-161.
9. Champod C., Taroni F. Les préjugés de l'Accusation ou de la Défense dans l'évaluation de la preuve technique. Revue pénale suisse. 111(3):1993;223-235.
10. Champod C., Taroni F. Probabilités au procès pénal - risques et solutions. Revue pénale suisse. 112(2):1994;194-219.
11. Committee on the Evaluation of Sound Spectrograms, N.R.C., 1979. On the Theory and Practice of Voice Identification. National technical Information Service, Washington DC.
12. Dienet, W., 1984 The applications of probabilistic methods in forensic science examination. In: The 10th IAFS triennial meeting, Oxford, UK.
13. Doddington G.R. Speaker recognition - Identifying people by their voices. Proceedings of IEEE. 73(11):1985;1651-1664.
14. Evett I.W. What is the probability that this blood came from that person? A meaningful question. Journal of the Forensic Science Society. 23:1983;35-39.
15. Evett I.W. Interpretation of evidence. International Criminal Police Review. 444:1993;12-17.
16. Evett I.W. Avoiding the transposed conditional. Science and Justice. 35(2):1995;127-131.
17. Evett I.W., Weir B.S. Flawed reasoning in court. Chance: New Directions for Statistics and Computing. 4(4):1991;19-21.
18. Fairley W.B., Mosteller F. A conversation about Collins. The University of Chicago Law Review. 41:1974;242-253.
19. Fienberg, S.E., 1989. The Evolving Role of Statistical Assessments as Evidence in the Courts. Springer, New York. Vol. 1, p. 357.
20. Fienberg, S.E., Finkelstein, M.O., 1996. Bayesian Statistics and the Law. In: Bernardo, J.M., Berger, J.O., Dawid, A.P., Smith, A.F.M. (Eds.), Bayesian Statistics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, Vol. 5, pp. 129-146.
21. Figueiredo, R.M., Palhares, F.A.B., Nagle, E.J., 1995. Description of a real case involving the identification of speaker and the authentification of a magnetic tape recording. In: Jacob, B., Bonte, W. (Eds.), Advances in Forensic Sciences. Verlag Dr. Köster, Berlin. Vol. 3, pp. 35-44.
22. Hilton O. The relationship of mathematical probability to the handwriting identification problem. International Journal of Forensic Document Examiners. 1(3):1995;224-229.
23. Huber R.A. The quandary of "qualified" opinions. Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal. 13(3):1980;1-8.
24. Hummel K. On the theory and practice of Essen-Möller's W value and Gürtler's paternity index. Forensic Science International. 25:1984;1-17.
25. Kaye D.H. Proof in law and science. Jurimetrics Journal. 32(3):1992;313-321.
26. Kaye D.H. DNA evidence: Probability, population genetics, and the courts. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology. 7(1):1993;101-172.
27. Kind S.S. Crime investigation and the criminal trial: A three chapter paradigm of evidence. Journal of the Forensic Science Society. 34:1994;155-164.
28. Koehler J.J. Error and exaggeration in the presentation of DNA evidence at trial. Jurimetrics Journal. 34(1):1993;21-39.
29. Künzel, H., 1994. Current approaches to forensic speaker recognition. In: Proceedings of the ESCA Workshop on Automatic Speaker Recognition Identification Verification, Martigny, Switzerland.
30. Kwan, Q.Y., 1977. Inference of identity of source. Ph.D. thesis of Criminology. Department of Forensic Science, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
31. Lempert R.O. Modeling relevance. Michigan Law Review. 75:1977;1021-1057.
32. Lempert R.O. The suspect population and DNA identification. Jurimetrics Journal. 34(1):1993;1-7.
33. Lewis S.R. Philosophy of speaker identification. Police applications of speech and tape recording analysis. Proceeding of the Institute of Acoustics. 6(1):1984;69-77.
34. Majewski W., Basztura C. Integrated approach to speaker recognition in forensic applications. Forensic Linguistics. 3(1):1996;50-64.
35. O'Shaughnessy D. Speaker recognition. IEEE ASSP Magazine. 3:1986;4-17.
36. Paoloni, A., Falcone, M., Bimbot, F., Chollet, G., 1994. Outline of a comprehensive assessment methodology for speaker recognition task in forensic application. In: Annual Meeting of the International Association For Forensic Phonetics. Cardiff, 9-13 July.
37. Redmayne, M., 1995. Doubts and burdens: DNA evidence, probability and the courts. Criminal Law Review, 464-482.
38. Robertson, B., Vignaux, G.A., 1992. Unhelpful evidence in paternity cases. New Zealand Law Journal 9, 315-317.
39. Robertson B., Vignaux G.A. Crime investigation and the criminal trial. Journal of the Forensic Science Society. 34(4):1994a;270.
40. Robertson B., Vignaux G.A. The interpretation of fingerprints. Expert Evidence. 3(1):1994b;3-8.
41. Robertson, B., Vignaux, G.A., 1995. Interpreting Evidence - Evaluating Forensic Science in the Courtroom. Wiley, Chichester, UK.
42. Royall, R.M., 1997. Statistical Evidence - A Likelihood Paradigm. Chapman & Hall, London.
43. Rudram D.A. Interpretation of scientific evidence. Science and Justice. 36(3):1996;133-138.
44. Sez. V, l., 1994. Massimario No. 23. La Giustizia Penale 35 (1 (Gennaio)), 42.
45. Stoney, D.A., 1985. Quantitative assessment of fingerprint individuality. Ph.D. dissertation. Graduate Division, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
46. Stoney, D.A., 1991. Transfer evidence. In: Aitken, C.G.G., Stoney, D.A. (Eds.), The Use of Statistics in Forensic Science. Ellis Horwood, New York, pp. 27-50.
47. Taroni F., Aitken C.G.G. Interpretation of scientific evidence. Science and Justice. 36(4):1996a;290-292.
48. Taroni, F., Aitken, C.G.G. 1996b. Probabilities and DNA Evidence in Paternity and Criminal Cases. Judicial Questions and Fallacious Answers. 75. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Rechtsmedizin, Zürich. 24-28 September 1996.
49. Taroni F., Aitken C.G.G. Forensic science at trial. Jurimetrics Journal. 37:1997;327-337.
50. Taroni F., Champod C., Margot P.A. Forerunners of Bayesianism in early forensic science. Jurimetrics Journal. 38:1998;183-200.
51. Thompson W.C., Schumann E.L. Interpretation of statistical evidence in criminal trials the prosecutor's fallacy and the defense attorney's fallacy. Law and Human Behavior. 11(3):1987;167-187.
52. Tuthill, H., 1994. Individualization: Principles and Procedures in Criminalistics. Lightning Powder, Salem.
53. TWGFAST, 1997. Technical working group on friction ridge analysis, study and technology (TWGFAST) proposed guidelines. Journal of Forensic Identification 47 (4), 423-437.
54. Walsh K.A.J., Buckleton J.S., Triggs C.M. A practical example on the interpretation of glass evidence. Science and Justice. 36(4):1996;213-218.