Login or Register to save videos, comment and join the community trends. NO ADS!

Statistical evaluation of forensic DNA evidence

· N/A · 381
Posted 1 year ago
RSS, statistics, Roberto Puch-Solis, DNA evidence, forensics
Description: RSS 2014 International Conference, 1-4 September, Sheffield UKRoberto Puch-SolisConsultant Statistician, LGC Forensics
Duration: 35 minutes and 16 seconds
Rating: Unavailable
Definition: HD
Published: February 03, 2016
Uploader: RoyalStatSoc

Comments

Login / Register to comment.

Related Videos

Motivate videos - maths.org • 1 year ago
In court, the jury is told that DNA found at the crime scene is very likely to have come from the suspect. How good is this as evidence? A couple have two children, both of whom die of cot death. Is this such an unlikely coincidence that there must be some other explanation? In many countries, people are routinely tested for certain cancers, including bowel, breast, prostate and cervical cancers. But does a positive test mean you definitely have cancer? Whether evidence is used in a court of law or in a diagnostic test, or in a variety of other everyday situations, we need to understand how probability and statistics can help us to evaluate that evidence. This video clip, featuring Professor Philip Dawid, is part of a set of free online mathematics resources designed to help school students become informed citizens, who can understand that unless we ask the right questions, we won't do the right things with the numbers. For accompanying resources, see http://maths.org/MathsHealth http://nrich.maths.org/12180 and a related article on how statistics can help us assess DNA evidence: https://plus.maths.org/content/os/issue55/features/dnacourt/index Philip Dawid is Emeritus Professor of Statistics at the University of Cambridge. The resources were created by the Millennium Mathematics Project (maths.org) at the University of Cambridge, originally for our Motivate programme, and development was funded by a grant from the Wellcome Trust.
TrueAllele • 5 years ago
In DNA identification science, the likelihood ratio (LR) assesses the evidential support for the identification hypothesis that a suspect contributed their DNA to the biological evidence. The LR summarizes the sensitivity and specificity of a statistical test. The LR logarithm is a standard information measure for stating the support for a simple hypothesis (i.e., a single assertion relative to its logical alternative). After Alan Turing's LR methods cracked the German Enigma code during World War II, LR usage became widespread. The LR is ubiquitous in the physical, biological, social, economic, computer and forensic sciences. First introduced into biological identification through paternity testing, the LR enjoys unparalleled international usage as the most informative DNA mixture statistic. Yet American crime labs shun the LR, and prefer to report DNA inclusion statistics that they find easier to explain in court. Such "inclusion" methods (variously termed PI, CPI, CPE or RMNE) use less of the DNA data, typically discarding a million-fold factor of identification information. Thus highly informative DNA mixture evidence can be reported as "inconclusive" or assigned an unrealistically low match score. Unfortunately, minimizing DNA evidence leads to a failure to identify criminals, with an adverse effect on public safety. To make the LR more acceptable to American analysts and their juries, we need more intuitive ways to explain the LR. Fortunately, the LR can be expressed (by Bayes theorem) in several equivalent ways. Stated in plain English, these alternative formulations include: 1. the information gain in the identification hypothesis from the DNA data, 2. how well the identification hypothesis explains the data, relative to its alternative, and 3. our increased belief in a match to a suspect, based on the inferred evidence genotype. The second LR formulation prevails in forensic DNA. While natural for computers and statisticians, non-mathematicians often find its formulas opaque. In this talk, we describe the other two formulations as intuitive ways to explain the LR simply and accurately. Moreover, these other approaches avoid the dread "transposed conditional." Using DNA case examples, we show how to easily understand the LR, present it in court, and deflect superficial challenges. For the American public to benefit from the full protective power of DNA identification information, analysts must be able to confidently explain the LR. This talk shows them how. http://www.cybgen.com/information/presentations/2010/ISHI/Perlin_Explaining_the_likelihood_ratio_in_DNA_mixture_interpretation/page.shtml
stanfordlawschool • 3 years ago
On May 30, 2014, CodeX: The Stanford Center for Legal Informatics hosted the conference "Trial With and Without Mathematics: Legal, Philosophical, and Computational Perspectives." The conference brought together experts in law, statistics, philosophy, and computer science to address whether lawyers need mathematical training in statistics and logic, and whether computers support legal decision making. This video is from session two on "How Should Forensic Scientists Explain Their Evidence to Juries."
TEDx Talks • 2 years ago
This talk was given at a local TEDx event, produced independently of the TED Conferences. The science of DNA profiling is sound, but much of what passes as DNA profiling is not scientific. Many testing labs resist interpreting evidence samples without having knowledge of a suspect's reference DNA profile. Blind interpretation of test results is possible and would greatly increase the reliability of the statistical weights given to DNA profile matches in some cases. Dan is a professor in the Department of Biological Sciences at Wright State University where he has been a faculty member since 1993 and where he currently serves as the President of the Faculty. He graduated with a Bachelor’s degree for a double major in Biology and Chemistry from John Carroll University, and a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from the Cell and Molecular Biology Department at the Pennsylvania State University in 1990. Dan is also the president and a co-founder of Forensic Bioinformatic Services Inc., where he has overseen the development and implementation of software designed to automatically and objectively review STR DNA testing results. About TEDx, x independently organized event In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized.* (*Subject to certain rules and regulations)
RoyalStatSoc • 1 year ago
RSS 2014 International Conference, 1-4 September, Sheffield UK Colin Aitken Professor of Forensic Statistics, University of Edinburgh
TrueAllele • 5 years ago
People and the courts may desire certainty, but all scientific data are inherently uncertain, including DNA evidence. Probability is used in science to describe uncertainty. Since forensic DNA is an information science, probabilistic computing can help objectively preserve maximal identification information. DNA information is simply a change in match probability based on the evidence. We first introduce the key ideas of genotype (actual, data, inferred) and match (likelihood ratio) using simple genetic inheritance. We then apply these concepts to phenotype STR evidence data, comparing quantitative computer mixture interpretation with manual threshold methods. We next examine several cases to see how probabilistic computer interpretation of forensic DNA evidence can tame uncertainty in ways that human review cannot. We take a look at validation studies that establish that computer DNA interpretation is more powerful than human review. We conclude by considering the benefits to public safety of using scientific computing that preserves DNA evidence information. http://www.cybgen.com/information/presentations/2011/ENFSI/Perlin_Taming_uncertainty_in_forensic_DNA_evidence/page.shtml
Julia Galef • 2 years ago
I use pictures to illustrate the mechanics of "Bayes' rule," a mathematical theorem about how to update your beliefs as you encounter new evidence. Then I tell three stories from my life that show how I use Bayes' rule to improve my thinking.
TED • 10 years ago
http://www.ted.com With the drama and urgency of a sportscaster, statistics guru Hans Rosling uses an amazing new presentation tool, Gapminder, to present data that debunks several myths about world development. Rosling is professor of international health at Sweden's Karolinska Institute, and founder of Gapminder, a nonprofit that brings vital global data to life. (Recorded February 2006 in Monterey, CA.) TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, and TEDTalks cover these topics as well as science, business, development and the arts. Closed captions and translated subtitles in a variety of languages are now available on TED.com, at http://www.ted.com/translate. Follow us on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/tednews Checkout our Facebook page for TED exclusives https://www.facebook.com/TED
Dan Krane • 4 years ago
Harvard University • 1 year ago
As part of the DNA lecture series at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Robin W. Cotton reports on the current state of forensic DNA testing and explains why there are still bumps in the road. Robin W. Cotton is an associate professor and the director of the Biomedical Forensic Sciences Program at the Boston University School of Medicine