A comment on the PCAST report: Skip the “match”/“non-match” stage

A comment on the PCAST report: Skip the “match”/“non-match” stage

Highlights • Feature-comparison methods produce continuously-valued data. • The PCAST report advocates a two-stage procedure: • (1) Dichotomise the data into “match” or “non-match”. • (2) If “match”, assess correct acceptance and false acceptance rates. • A better procedure would directly statistica...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Forensic science international 2017-03, Vol.272, p.e7-e9
Hauptverfasser: Morrison, Geoffrey Stewart, Kaye, David H, Balding, David J, Taylor, Duncan, Dawid, Philip, Aitken, Colin G.G, Gittelson, Simone, Zadora, Grzegorz, Robertson, Bernard, Willis, Sheila, Pope, Susan, Neil, Martin, Martire, Kristy A, Hepler, Amanda, Gill, Richard D, Jamieson, Allan, Zoete, Jacob de, Ostrum, R. Brent, Caliebe, Amke
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
False alarm
Forensic sciences
Forensic statistics
Likelihood ratio
Match/non-match
Methods
Pathology
PCAST report
Sensitivity
Validity
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Highlights • Feature-comparison methods produce continuously-valued data. • The PCAST report advocates a two-stage procedure: • (1) Dichotomise the data into “match” or “non-match”. • (2) If “match”, assess correct acceptance and false acceptance rates. • A better procedure would directly statistically model the continuously-valued data.
ISSN:0379-0738
1872-6283
DOI:10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.10.018