自动比较和评估金属丝上的条纹切割钳工具印记。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, LEGAL
Jean-Alexandre Patteet, Christophe Champod
{"title":"自动比较和评估金属丝上的条纹切割钳工具印记。","authors":"Jean-Alexandre Patteet,&nbsp;Christophe Champod","doi":"10.1016/j.forsciint.2024.112239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Toolmarks examination validity and subjectivity have come under scrutiny. This research focuses on the case of cutting plier marks. This paper presents an automatic comparison method and assesses its performance. It is designed to assign a weight to the forensic evidence (i.e, a comparison between toolmarks) with a likelihood ratio (LR). 3D topographies are acquired and treated to be compared using a set of correlation metrics. A machine learning algorithm combines comparison metrics and enables LR computation. Pliers of various brands and models were used to study the variability both within and between tools. We explained why the specific zone (area along the blade) has to be chosen to build the within-source variability and how the between-source variability can be built in different scenarios. Misleading evidence rates between 0 % and 4 % have been measured and it demonstrates the accuracy of the method when applied on the pliers used.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12341,"journal":{"name":"Forensic science international","volume":"364 ","pages":"Article 112239"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Automated comparison and evaluation of striated cutting plier toolmarks on metal wires\",\"authors\":\"Jean-Alexandre Patteet,&nbsp;Christophe Champod\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.forsciint.2024.112239\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Toolmarks examination validity and subjectivity have come under scrutiny. This research focuses on the case of cutting plier marks. This paper presents an automatic comparison method and assesses its performance. It is designed to assign a weight to the forensic evidence (i.e, a comparison between toolmarks) with a likelihood ratio (LR). 3D topographies are acquired and treated to be compared using a set of correlation metrics. A machine learning algorithm combines comparison metrics and enables LR computation. Pliers of various brands and models were used to study the variability both within and between tools. We explained why the specific zone (area along the blade) has to be chosen to build the within-source variability and how the between-source variability can be built in different scenarios. Misleading evidence rates between 0 % and 4 % have been measured and it demonstrates the accuracy of the method when applied on the pliers used.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12341,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forensic science international\",\"volume\":\"364 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112239\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forensic science international\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073824003219\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic science international","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073824003219","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

工具标记检验的有效性和主观性受到了审查。本研究重点关注切割钳标记的情况。本文介绍了一种自动比对方法,并对其性能进行了评估。该方法旨在通过似然比 (LR) 为法医证据(即工具印记之间的比较)分配权重。获取三维拓扑图并进行处理,然后使用一组相关指标进行比较。机器学习算法将比较指标结合起来,实现了 LR 计算。我们使用不同品牌和型号的钳子来研究工具内部和工具之间的可变性。我们解释了为什么必须选择特定区域(沿刀片的区域)来建立源内变异性,以及如何在不同情况下建立源间变异性。我们测得的误导证据率在 0 % 到 4 % 之间,这证明了该方法在用于钳子时的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Automated comparison and evaluation of striated cutting plier toolmarks on metal wires
Toolmarks examination validity and subjectivity have come under scrutiny. This research focuses on the case of cutting plier marks. This paper presents an automatic comparison method and assesses its performance. It is designed to assign a weight to the forensic evidence (i.e, a comparison between toolmarks) with a likelihood ratio (LR). 3D topographies are acquired and treated to be compared using a set of correlation metrics. A machine learning algorithm combines comparison metrics and enables LR computation. Pliers of various brands and models were used to study the variability both within and between tools. We explained why the specific zone (area along the blade) has to be chosen to build the within-source variability and how the between-source variability can be built in different scenarios. Misleading evidence rates between 0 % and 4 % have been measured and it demonstrates the accuracy of the method when applied on the pliers used.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Forensic science international
Forensic science international 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
9.10%
发文量
285
审稿时长
49 days
期刊介绍: Forensic Science International is the flagship journal in the prestigious Forensic Science International family, publishing the most innovative, cutting-edge, and influential contributions across the forensic sciences. Fields include: forensic pathology and histochemistry, chemistry, biochemistry and toxicology, biology, serology, odontology, psychiatry, anthropology, digital forensics, the physical sciences, firearms, and document examination, as well as investigations of value to public health in its broadest sense, and the important marginal area where science and medicine interact with the law. The journal publishes: Case Reports Commentaries Letters to the Editor Original Research Papers (Regular Papers) Rapid Communications Review Articles Technical Notes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信