{"title":"Cell site analysis; testing understanding via internal consistency checks","authors":"Matt Tart, Robert Moore","doi":"10.1016/j.scijus.2024.12.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper is aimed at Cell Site Analysis Expert Witnesses. Ground Truth Data (GTD) are essential to validation exercises, but in the UK access to practitioner-generated Call Data Records (the traces considered by Cell Site Analysis experts) are restricted, reducing opportunities for practitioners to test their understanding against real-world data. This paper outlines methods by which casework material might be used to potentially detect issues within understanding of uncertainties (and therefore improve the reliability of analyses) by reviewing the properties of casework material in parallel with the casework assessment being conducted. Four case examples are given in which assessments of the reliability of understanding of uncertainties are tested (two examples for assessing Call Data Record GPRS time uncertainties, one for reliability of survey results and one for assessing the reliability of “geo” data from Encrochat examinations). The methods proposed are intended to provide a deeper layer of Quality Assurance; they are not intended to replace validation using GTD.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49565,"journal":{"name":"Science & Justice","volume":"65 1","pages":"Pages 27-34"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Justice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355030624001205","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper is aimed at Cell Site Analysis Expert Witnesses. Ground Truth Data (GTD) are essential to validation exercises, but in the UK access to practitioner-generated Call Data Records (the traces considered by Cell Site Analysis experts) are restricted, reducing opportunities for practitioners to test their understanding against real-world data. This paper outlines methods by which casework material might be used to potentially detect issues within understanding of uncertainties (and therefore improve the reliability of analyses) by reviewing the properties of casework material in parallel with the casework assessment being conducted. Four case examples are given in which assessments of the reliability of understanding of uncertainties are tested (two examples for assessing Call Data Record GPRS time uncertainties, one for reliability of survey results and one for assessing the reliability of “geo” data from Encrochat examinations). The methods proposed are intended to provide a deeper layer of Quality Assurance; they are not intended to replace validation using GTD.
期刊介绍:
Science & Justice provides a forum to promote communication and publication of original articles, reviews and correspondence on subjects that spark debates within the Forensic Science Community and the criminal justice sector. The journal provides a medium whereby all aspects of applying science to legal proceedings can be debated and progressed. Science & Justice is published six times a year, and will be of interest primarily to practising forensic scientists and their colleagues in related fields. It is chiefly concerned with the publication of formal scientific papers, in keeping with its international learned status, but will not accept any article describing experimentation on animals which does not meet strict ethical standards.
Promote communication and informed debate within the Forensic Science Community and the criminal justice sector.
To promote the publication of learned and original research findings from all areas of the forensic sciences and by so doing to advance the profession.
To promote the publication of case based material by way of case reviews.
To promote the publication of conference proceedings which are of interest to the forensic science community.
To provide a medium whereby all aspects of applying science to legal proceedings can be debated and progressed.
To appeal to all those with an interest in the forensic sciences.