Emulating DNA: Rigorous quantification of evidential weight in transparent and testable forensic speaker recognition

IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech and Language Processing

Volumn 15, Issue 7, 2007, Pages 2104-2115

  Gonzalez Rodriguez, Joaquin ^a   Rose, Phil ^b   Ramos, Daniel ^a   Toledano, Doroteo T ^a   Ortega Garcia, Javier ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Admissibility of speech evidence; Calibration; Daubert; Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA); Forensic speaker recognition (FSR); Likelihood ratio (LR)

Indexed keywords

ADMISSIBILITY OF SPEECH EVIDENCE; DAUBERT; DEOXYRIBONUCLEIC ACID (DNA); FORENSIC SPEAKER RECOGNITION (FSR); LIKELIHOOD RATIO (LR);

CALIBRATION; DNA; ELECTRIC REACTORS; GENES; LINGUISTICS; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION; NUCLEIC ACIDS; ORGANIC ACIDS;

SPEECH RECOGNITION;

EID: 64249127238     PISSN: 15587916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/TASL.2007.902747     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. C. G. G. Aitken and F. Taroni, Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2004.
2. C. G. G. Aitken and D. Lucy, "Evaluation of trace evidence in the form of multivariate data," Applied Statistics 53, pp. 109-122, with corrigendum pp. 665-666, 2005.
3. D. Ramos, J. Gonzalez-Rodriguez, G. Zadora, J. Zieba-Palus, and C. G. G. Aitken, "Information-theoretical comparison of likelihood ratio methods of forensic evidence evaluation," in Proc. Int. Workshop Comput. Forensics, Manchester, U.K., 2007.
4. R. Auckenthaler, M. Carey, and H. Lloyd-Tomas, "Score normalization for text-independent speaker verification systems," Digital Signal Process., vol. 10, pp. 42-54, 2000.
5. D. J. Balding, Weight-of-Evidence for Forensic DNA Profiles. New York: Wiley, 2005.
6. J. R. L. Bernard, "Some measurements of some sounds of Australian English," Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. Sydney, Sydney, Australia, 1967.
7. B. Black, F. J. Ayala, and C. Saffran-Brinks, "Science and the law in the wake of Daubert: A new search for scientific knowledge," Texas Law Rev., vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 715-761, 1994.
8. J. F. Bonastre, F. Bimbot, L.-J. Boe, J. P. Campbell, D. A. Reynolds, and I. Magrin-Chanolleau, "Person authentication by voice: A need for caution," in Proc. Eurospeech, 2003, pp. 33-36.
9. A. Braun et al., "Is forensic speaker identification unethical?-Or can it be unethical not to do it," Forensic Ling., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 10-21, 1998.
10. N. Brummer and J. du Preez, "Application independent evaluation of speaker detection," Comput. Speech Lang., vol. 20, no. 2-3, pp. 230-275, 2006.
11. N. Brummer, "Focal tlkt." [Online]. Available: http://www.dsp.sun.ac.za/nbrummer/focal/
12. J. P. Campbell, H. Nakasone, C. Cieri, D. Miller, K. Walker, A. F. Martin, and M. A. Przybocki, "The MMSR bilingual and crosschannel corpora for speaker recognition research and evaluation," in Proc. Odyssey, 2004, pp. 29-32.
13. J. P. Campbell, "Linguistics and the science behind speaker identification," 2005 [Online]. Available: http://www.nasonline.org/site/ Page-Server?pagename=sackler-forensic-presentations
14. W. M. Campbell, D. A. Reynolds, J. P. Campbell, and K. J. Brady, "Estimating and evaluating confidence for forensic speaker recognition," in Proc. ICASSP, 2005, pp. 717-720.
15. W. M. Campbell, D. E. Sturim, and D. A. Reynolds, "Support vector machines using GMM supervectors for speaker verification," IEEE Signal Process. Lett., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 308-311, 2006.
16. C. Champod et al., "The inference of identity in forensic speaker recognition," Speech Commun., vol. 31, pp. 193-203, 2000.
17. C. Champod, , J. Siegel, P. Saukko, and G. Knupfer, Eds., "Identification/ individualization: Overview and meaning of ID," in Encyclopedia of Forensic Science. London, U.K.: Academic, 2000, pp. 1077-1083.
18. C. Champod et al., "A probabilistic approach to fingerprint evidence," J. Forensic Ident., vol. 51, pp. 101-122, 2001.
19. S. A. Cole, "A history of fingerprinting and criminal identification," 2005 [Online]. Available: http://www.nasonline.org/site/ Page-Server?pagename=sackler-forensic-presentations
20. S. A. Cole, "More than zero: Accounting for error in latent fingerprint identification," J. Criminal Law Criminol., vol. 95, no. 3, pp. 985-1078, 2005.
21. J. M. Curran et al., Forensic Interpretation of Glass Evidence. Boca Raton, FL: CRC, 2000.
22. U.S. Supreme Court, "Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals 509 U.S. 579," 1993.
23. M. H. deGroot and S. E. Fienberg, "The comparison and evaluation of forecasters," Statist., vol. 32, pp. 12-22, 1982.
24. DNA Advisory Board, "Statistical and population genetics issues affecting the evaluation of the frequency of occurrence of DNA profiles calculated from pertinent population database(s)," Forensic Sci. Commun., vol. 2, no. 3, 2000 [Online]. Available: http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/ fsc/backissu/july2000/dnastat.htm
25. G. Doddington et al., "Sheeps, goats, lambs and wolves: A statistical analysis of speaker performance in the NIST 1998 speaker recognition evaluation," in Proc. ICSLP, 1998.
26. I. W. Evett, "Interpretation, a Personal Odyssey," in The Use of Statistics in Forensic Science, C. G. G. Aitken and D. A. Stoney, Eds. Chichester, U.K.: Ellis Horwood, 1991, pp. 9-22.
27. I. W. Evett et al., "Statistical analysis of STR data," in Advances in Forensic Haemogenetics. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1996, vol. 6, pp. 79-86.
28. I. W. Evett, "Towards a uniform framework for reporting opinions in forensic science casework," Sci. Justice, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 198-202, 1998.
29. L. A. Foreman et al., "Interpreting DNA evidence: A review," Int. Statist. Rev., vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 473-495, 2003.
30. J. L. Gauvain et al., "Maximum a posteriori estimation for multivariate Gaussian mixture observations of Markov chains," IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 291-298, Apr. 1994.
31. J. Gonzalez-Rodriguez, A. Drygajlo, D. Ramos, M. Garcia-Gomar, and J. Ortega-Garcia, "Robust estimation, interpretation and assessment of likelihood ratios in forensic speaker recognition," Comput. Speech Lang., vol. 20, no. 2-3, pp. 331-355, 2006.
32. J. Gonzalez-Rodriguez, J. Ortega-Garcia, and J. J. Lucena-Molina, "On the application of the bayesian framework to real forensic conditions with GMM-based systems," in Proc. Odyssey Speaker Recognition Workshop, Crete, Greece, 2001, pp. 135-138.
33. US Dept. of justice and office of the inspector general-Oversight and review division, "A review of the FBI's handling of the Brandon Mayfield case (unclassified and redacted)," Washington, DC, 2006.
34. M. Khodai-Joopari, "Forensic speaker analysis and identification by computer: A Bayesian approach anchored in the cepstral domain," Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2006.
35. T. Kuhn, The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: Univ. Chicago Press, 1962.
36. H. J. Künzell, "Current approaches to forensic speaker recognition," in Proc. ESCA Workshop Automatic Speaker Recognition, Martigny, Switzerland, 1994, pp. 135-141.
37. D. V. Lindley, "A problem in forensic science," Biometrika, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 207-213, 1977.
38. D. V. Lindley, "Bayesian thoughts," Significance, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 73-75, Jun. 2004.
39. D. Meuwly, "Reconaissance de locuteurs en sciences forensiques: l'apport d'une approche automatique," Ph.D. dissertation, IPSC, Univ. Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2001.
40. National Academy of Sciences Sackler Colloquium, "Forensic science: The Nexus of science and the law." 2005 [Online]. Available: http://www.nasonline.org/site/PageServer?pagename=sackler-forensic
41. NIST, "2005 speaker recognition evaluation plan." 2005 [Online]. Available: http://www.nist.gov/speech/tests/spk/2005/index.htm
42. NIST, "2006 speaker recognition evaluation plan." 2006 [Online]. Available: http://www.nist.gov/speech/tests/spk/2006/index.htm
43. quot;National Research Council, Committee on DNA Technology in Forensic Science," in DNA Technology in Forensic Science. Washington, DC: National Academy, 1992.
44. quot;National research council-Committee on DNA forensic science," in The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, D.C: National Academy, 1996.
45. S. Pigeon, P. Druyts, and P. Verlinde, "Applying logistic regression to the fusion of the NIST'99 1-speaker submissions," Digital Signal Process., vol. 10, pp. 237-248, 2000.
46. D. Ramos, J. Gonzalez-Rodriguez, A. Montero-Asenjo, and J. Ortega-Garcia, "Suspect-adapted MAP estimation of within-source distributions in generative likelihood ratio estimation," in Proc. IEEE Odyssey-06, San Juan, PR, 2006, pp. 1-5.
47. D. Ramos et al., "Likelihood ratio calibration in a transparent and testable forensic speaker recognition framework," in Proc. IEEE Odyssey-06, San Juan, PR, 2006, pp. 1-8.
48. D. Ramos et al., "Speaker verification using speaker- and test-dependent fast score normalization," Pattern Recognition Lett., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 90-98, 2006.
49. D. A. Reynolds et al., "Speaker verification using adapted Gaussian mixture models," Digital Signal Process., vol. 10, pp. 19-41, 2003.
50. D. A. Reynolds, "An overview of speaker recognition technology," in Proc. ICASSP, 2003, pp. 4072-4075.
51. D. A. Reynolds, "Channel robust speaker verification via feature mapping," in Proc. ICASSP, 2003, pp. 53-57.
52. P. Rose, Forensic Speaker Identification. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2002.
53. P. Rose et al., "Strength of forensic speaker identification evidence-Multispeaker formant and cepstrum based segmental discrimination with a bayesian likelihood ratio as threshold," Int. J. Speech Lang. Law, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 179-202, 2003.
54. P. Rose, "Technical forensic speaker recognition: Evaluation, types and testing of evidence," Comput. Speech Lang., vol. 20, no. 2-3, pp. 159-191, 2006.
55. P. Rose, Y. Kinoshita, and T. Alderman, P. Warren and C. Watson, Eds., "Realistic extrinsic forensic speaker discrimination with the diphthong/ ai/," in Proc. 11th Australian Int. Conf. Speech Sci. Technol., 2006, pp. 329-334.
56. P. Rose, P. Warren and C. Watson, Eds., "The intrinsic forensic discriminatory power of diphthongs," in Proc. 11th Australian Int. Conf. Speech Sci. Technol., 2006, pp. 64-69.
57. R. Royall, "On the probability of observing misleading statistical evidence," J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., vol. 95, no. 451, pp. 760-768, Sep. 2000.
58. M. J. Saks and J. J. Koehler, "The coming paradigm shift in forensic identification science," Science, vol. 309, no. 5736, pp. 892-895, 2005.
59. A. Solomonoff, W. M. Campbell, and I. Boardman, "Advances in channel compensation for SVM speaker recognition," in Proc. ICASSP, 2005, pp. 629-632.
60. D. A. Stoney, "What made us ever think we could individualize using statistics?," J. Forensic Sci. Soc., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 197-199, 1991.
61. F. Taroni et al., "De Finetti's subjectivism, the assessment of probabilities and the evaluation of evidence: A commentary for forensic scientists," Sci. Justice, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 145-150, 2001.
62. F. Taroni et al., "Decision analysis in forensic science," J. Forensic Sci., vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 894-905, 2005.
63. D. van Leeuwen et al., "Results of the 2003 NFI-TNO forensic speaker recognition evaluation," in Proc. Odyssey, 2004, pp. 75-82.
64. D. van Leeuwen, A. Martin, M. Przybocki, and J. Bouten, "The NIST 2004 and TNO/NFI speaker recognition evaluations," Comput. Speech Lang., vol. 20, no. 2-3, pp. 128-158, 2006.
65. S. J. Walsh, C. M. Triggs, and J. S. Buckleton, Eds., Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC, 2004.