Learning about Bayesian networks for forensic interpretation: An example based on the 'the problem of multiple propositions'

Science and Justice

Volumn 52, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 191-198

  Biedermann, A ^a   Voisard, R ^a   Taroni, F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Bayesian networks; Handwriting examination; Likelihood ratio; Multiple propositions; Teaching

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BAYESIAN LEARNING; FORENSIC SCIENCE; HANDWRITING; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; PROBABILITY; SKILL; TEACHING;

EID: 84864313371     PISSN: 13550306     EISSN: 18764452     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scijus.2012.05.004     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Aitken C.G.G., Stoney D.A. The Use of Statistics in Forensic Science 1991, Ellis Horwood, New York.
2. Aitken C.G.G. Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists 1995, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
3. Robertson B., Vignaux G.A. Interpreting Evidence. Evaluating Forensic Science in the Courtroom 1995, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
4. Aitken C.G.G., Taroni F. Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists 2004, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester. 2nd edition.
5. Buckleton J.S., Triggs C.M., Walsh S.J. Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation 2005, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
6. Balding D.J. Weight-of-Evidence for Forensic DNA Profiles 2005, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
7. Taroni F., Aitken C.G.G., Garbolino G., Biedermann A. Bayesian Networks and Probabilistic Inference in Forensic Science 2006, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
8. Edwards W. Influence diagrams, Bayesian imperialism, and the Collins case: An appeal to reason. Cardozo Law Review 1991, 13:1025-1074.
9. Robertson B., Vignaux G.A. Taking fact analysis seriously. Michigan Law Review 1993, 91:1442-1464.
10. Hammond V., Walker E.L. Walker, Teaching Bayesian Networks through Interactive Exploration. FLAIRS-96, Florida Articial Intelligence Research Symposium: proceedings of the Ninth Florida Articial Intelligence Research Symposium, Key West, Florida, May 20-22, 1996. Florida AI Research Society 1996.
11. Taroni F., Biedermann A., Garbolino P., Aitken C.G.G. A general approach to Bayesian networks for the interpretation of evidence. Forensic Science International 2004, 139:5-16.
12. Köller N., Niessen K., Riess M., Sadorf E. Probability Conclusions in Expert Opinions on Handwriting. Substantiation and Standardization of Probability Statements in Expert Opinions 2004, Luchterhand, München.
13. Stockton A., Day S. Bayes, Handwriting and Science. Proceedings of the 59th Annual ASQDE Meeting - Handwriting & Technology: at the Crossroads 2001, 1-10. Des Moines, Iowa, U.S.A.
14. Garbolino P. Explaining relevance. Cardozo Law Review 2001, 22:1503-1521.
15. Lindley D.V. Probability. The Use of Statistics in Forensic Science 1991, 27-50. Ellis Horwood, New York. C.G.G. Aitken, D.A. Stoney (Eds.).
16. Taroni F., Biedermann A. Inadequacies of posterior probabilities for the assessment of scientific evidence. Law, Probability and Risk 2005, 4:89-114.
17. Buckleton J.S., Triggs C.M., Champod C. An extended likelihood ratio framework for interpreting evidence. Science & Justice 2006, 46:69-78.
18. Pourret O., Naïm P., Marcot B. Bayesian networks: a practical guide to applications 2008, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
19. Goméz M. Real-world applications of influence diagrams. Advances in Bayesian networks 2004, 161-180. Springer, Berlin. J.A. Gámez, S. Moral, A. Salmerón (Eds.).
20. Aitken C.G.G., Roberts P., Jackson G. Fundamentals of Probability and Statistical Evidence in Criminal Proceedings, Guidance for Judges, Lawyers, Forensic Scientists and Expert Witnesses. Technical report, Royal Statistical SocietyÕs Working Group on Statistics and the Law 2010.
21. Dawid A.P., Mortera J., Pascali V.L., van Boxel D. Probabilistic expert systems for forensic inference from genetic markers. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 2002, 29:577-595.
22. Dawid A.P., Mortera J., Vicard P. Object-oriented Bayesian networks for complex forensic DNA profiling problems. Forensic Science International 2007, 169:195-205.
23. Buckleton J.S., Triggs C.M. Relatedness and DNA: are we taking it seriously enough?. Forensic Science International 2005, 152:115-119.