Likelihood ratio calculation for a disputed-utterance analysis with limited available data

Speech Communication

Volumn 58, Issue , 2014, Pages 81-90

  Morrison, Geoffrey Stewart ^a   Lindh, Jonas ^b   Curran, James M ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^c UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Disputed utterance; Forensic; Keywords; Likelihood ratio; Posterior predictive density; Reliability

Indexed keywords

COVARIANCE MATRIX; FORENSIC SCIENCE; GAUSSIAN DISTRIBUTION; RELIABILITY; SPEECH RECOGNITION; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

DISPUTED UTTERANCE; FORENSIC; KEYWORDS; LIKELIHOOD RATIOS; PREDICTIVE DENSITY;

MATRIX ALGEBRA;

EID: 84890288748     PISSN: 01676393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.specom.2013.11.004     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. N. Anderson On the calculation of filter coefficients for maximum entropy spectral analysis D.G. Childers, Modern Spectrum Analysis 1978 IEEE Press New York 252 255
2. J.M. Bernardo, and A.F.M. Smith Bayesian Theory 1994 Wiley Chichester, UK
3. Boersma, P., Weenik, D., 2008. Praat: doing phonetics by computer, ver. 5.0.03. Stable URL: http://www.praat.org/.
4. C. Champod, and I.W. Evett Commentary on Broeders (1999) 'some observations on the use of probability scales in forensic identification' Forensic Ling. 7 2000 238 243
5. J.M. Curran An introduction to Bayesian credible intervals for sampling error in DNA profiles Law Probab. Risk 4 2005 115 126 10.1093/lpr/mgi009
6. J.M. Curran, C.M. Triggs, J.R. Almirall, J.S. Buckleton, and K.A.J. Walsh The interpretation of elemental composition from forensic glass evidence: I Sci. Justice 37 1997 241 244 10.1016/S1355-0306(97)72197-X (Pubitemid 27507257)
7. J.M. Curran, C.M. Triggs, J.R. Almirall, J.S. Buckleton, and K.A.J. Walsh The interpetation of elemental composition from forensic glass evidence: II Sci. Justice 37 1997 245 249 10.1016/S1355-0306(97)72198-1 (Pubitemid 27507258)
8. J.M. Curran, J.S. Buckleton, C.M. Triggs, and B.S. Weir Assessing uncertainty in DNA evidence caused by sampling effects Sci. Justice 42 2002 29 37 10.1016/S1355-0306(02)71794-2 (Pubitemid 34754527)
9. A. Genz, and F. Bretz Computation of multivariate normal and t probabilities Lecture Notes in Statistics vol. 195 2009 Springer-Verlag Heidelberg, Germany 10.1007/978-3-642-01689-9
10. Genz, A., Bretz, F., Miwa, T., Mi, X., Leisch, F., Scheipl, F., Hothorn, T., 2012. mvtnorm: Multivariate normal and t distributions, R package ver. 0.9-9994. Stable URL: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=mvtnorm.
11. H. Hotelling The generalization of student's ratio Ann. Math. Stat. 2 1931 360 378 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2957535
12. D.H. Kaye Trawling DNA databases for partial matches: what is the FBI afraid of? Cornell J. Law Public Policy 19 2009 145 171
13. J.C. Lagarias, J.A. Reeds, M.H. Wright, and P.E. Wright Convergence properties of the Nelder-Mead simplex method in low dimensions SIAM J. Optim. 9 1998 112 147 10.1137/S1052623496303470
14. Lindh, J., Eriksson, A., 2009. The SweDat project and Swedia database for phonetic and acoustic research. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Conference on e-Science. IEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, pp. 45-49. doi: 10.1109/e-Science.15.
15. I. Lundeborg, M. Larsson, S. Wiman, and A.M. McAllister Voice onset time in Swedish children and adults Logoped. Phoniatr. Vocol. 37 2012 117 122 10.3109/14015439.2012.664654
16. MathWorks Inc., 2010. Matlab, software release 2010a. MathWorks Inc., Nantick, MA.
17. G.S. Morrison Measuring the validity and reliability of forensic likelihood-ratio systems Sci. Justice 51 2011 91 98 10.1016/j.scijus.2011.03.002
18. Morrison, G.S., Hoy, M., 2012. What did Bain really say? A preliminary forensic analysis of the disputed utterance based on data, acoustic analysis, statistical models, calculation of likelihood ratios, and testing of validity. In: Proceedings of the 46th Audio Engineering Society (AES) Conference on Audio Forensics: Recording, Recovery, Analysis, and Interpretation, Denver, CO, pp. 203-207.
19. A. Nordgaard, R. Ansell, W. Drotz, and L. Jaeger Scale of conclusions for the value of evidence Law Probab. Risk 11 2012 1 24 10.1093/lpr/mgr020
20. R Development Core Team, 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing, ver. 2.15.2, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Stable URL: http://www.R-project.org/.
21. R.D. Stoel, and M.J. Sjerps Interpretation of forensic evidence S. Roeser, R. Hillerbrand, P. Sandin, M. Peterson, Handbook of Risk Theory: Epistemology, Decision Theory, Ethics, and Social Implications of Risk 2012 Springer Netherlands Dordrecht, The Netherlands 135 158 10.1007/978-94-007-1433- 56
22. Student [Gosset, W.S.], 1908. The probable error of a mean. Biometrika 6, pp. 1-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomet/6.1.1.
23. Villalba, J., Brümmer, N., 2011. Towards fully Bayesian speaker recognition: Integrating out the between-speaker covariance. In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2011, The 12th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, Florence, Italy, pp. 505-508.
24. C. Zhang, G.S. Morrison, F. Ochoa, and E. Enzinger Reliability of human-supervised formant-trajectory measurement for forensic voice comparison J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 133 2013 EL54 EL60 10.1121/1.4773223