Modeling the forensic two-trace problem with Bayesian networks Simone Gittelson Email author Alex Biedermann Silvia Bozza Franco Taroni Article

First Online: 12 December 2012 DOI :
10.1007/s10506-012-9136-5

Cite this article as: Gittelson, S., Biedermann, A., Bozza, S. et al. Artif Intell Law (2013) 21: 221. doi:10.1007/s10506-012-9136-5
Abstract The forensic two-trace problem is a perplexing inference problem introduced by Evett (J Forensic Sci Soc 27:375–381, 1987 ). Different possible ways of wording the competing pair of propositions (i.e., one proposition advanced by the prosecution and one proposition advanced by the defence) led to different quantifications of the value of the evidence (Meester and Sjerps in Biometrics 59:727–732, 2003 ). Here, we re-examine this scenario with the aim of clarifying the interrelationships that exist between the different solutions, and in this way, produce a global vision of the problem. We propose to investigate the different expressions for evaluating the value of the evidence by using a graphical approach, i.e. Bayesian networks, to model the rationale behind each of the proposed solutions and the assumptions made on the unknown parameters in this problem.

Keywords Evaluation of evidence Value of the evidence Graphical probability models Bayesian networks Two-trace problem

References Aitken CGG, Gammerman A (1989) Probabilistic reasoning in evidential assessment. J Forensic Sci Soc 29:303–316

CrossRef Aitken CGG, Taroni F (2004) Statistics and the evaluation of evidence for forensic scientists, 2nd ed. Wiley, Chichester

MATH CrossRef Biedermann A, Taroni F, Delemont O, Semadeni C, Davison A (2005a) The evaluation of evidence in the forensic investigation of fire incidents (Part I): an approach using Bayesian networks. Forensic Sci Int 147:49–57

CrossRef Biedermann A, Taroni F, Delemont O, Semadeni C, Davison A (2005b) The evaluation of evidence in the forensic investigation of fire incidents (Part II): practical examples of the use of Bayesian networks. Forensic Sci Int 147:59–69

CrossRef Biedermann A, Taroni F (2006) A probabilistic approach to the joint evaluation of firearm evidence and gunshot residues. Forensic Sci Int 163:18–33

CrossRef Biedermann A, Bozza S, Taroni F (2009) Probabilistic evidential assessment of gunshot residue particle evidence (Part I): likelihood ratio calculation and case pre-assessment using Bayesian networks. Forensic Sci Int 191:24–35

CrossRef Cook R, Evett IW, Jackson G, Jones P, Lambert J (1998) A hierarchy of propositions: deciding which level to address in casework. Sci Just 38:231–239

CrossRef Dawid AP (2004) Which likelihood ratio? Comment on ‘Why the effect of prior odds should accompany the likelihood ratio when reporting DNA evidence’ by R. Meester and M. Sjerps. Law Prob Risk 3:65–71

Dawid AP, Mortera J, Pascali V, van Boxel D (2002) Probabilistic expert systems for forensic inference from genetic markers. Scand J Stat 29:577–595

MATH CrossRef Dawid AP, Mortera J, Vicard P (2007) Object-oriented Bayesian networks for complex forensic DNA profiling problems. Forensic Sci Int 169:195–205

CrossRef Edwards W (1991) Influence diagrams, Bayesian imperialism, and the Collins case: an appeal to reason. Cardozo Law Rev 13:1025–1079

Evett IW (1987) On meaningful questions: a two-trace transfer problem. J Forensic Sci Soc 27:375–381

CrossRef Evett IW (1998) Towards a uniform framework for reporting opinions in forensic science casework. Sci Just 38:198–202

CrossRef Fenton NE, Neil M (2011) Avoiding probabilistic reasoning fallacies in legal practice using Bayesian networks. Aust J Leg Philos 36:114–151

Fenton NE, Neil M, Lagnado D (2011) Modelling mutually exclusive causes in Bayesian networks. Working paper.

http://www.eecs.qmul.ac.uk/~norman/papers/mutual_IEEE_format_version.pdf . Accessed 8 Oct 2012

Garbolino P (2001) Explaining relevance. Cardozo Law Rev 22:1503–1521

Garbolino P, Taroni F (2002) Evaluation of scientific evidence using Bayesian networks. Forensic Sci Int 125:149–155

CrossRef Gittelson S, Biedermann A, Bozza S, Taroni F (2012) Bayesian networks and the value of the evidence for the forensic two-trace transfer problem. J Forensic Sci 57:1199–1216

CrossRef Goray M, Eken E, Mitchell RJ, van Oorschot RAH (2010) Secondary DNA transfer of biological substances under varying test conditions. Forensic Sci Int Genet 4:62–67

CrossRef Jensen F (2001) Bayesian networks and decision graphs. Springer, New York

MATH Kadane JB, Schum DA (1996) A probabilistic analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti evidence. Wiley, New York

Kjaerulff UB, Madsen AL (2008) Bayesian networks and influence diagrams: a guide to construction and analysis. Springer, New York

MATH Lindley DV (1977) Probability and the law. Statistician 26:203–220

CrossRef Lindley DV (2000) The philosophy of statistics. Statistician 49:293–337

Meester R, Sjerps M (2003) The evidential value in the DNA database search controversy and the two-stain problem. Biometrics 59:727–732

MathSciNet MATH CrossRef Meester R, Sjerps M (2004a) Why the effect of prior odds should accompany the likelihood ratio when reporting DNA evidence. Law Prob Risk 3:51–62

CrossRef Meester R, Sjerps M (2004b) Response to Dawid, Balding, Triggs and Buckleton (concerning: why the effect of prior odds should accompany the likelihood ratio when reporting DNA evidence. Law, Prob. and Risk 3:51–62). Law Prob Risk 3:83–86

Mortera J, Dawid AP, Lauritzen S (2003) Probabilistic expert systems for DNA mixture profiling. Theor Popul Biol 63:191–205

MATH CrossRef Robertson B, Vignaux GA (1995) Interpreting evidence. Wiley, Chichester

Schum DA (1994) The evidential foundations of probabilistic reasoning. Wiley, New York

Taroni F, Aitken CGG, Garbolino P, Biedermann A (2006) Bayesian networks and probabilistic inference in forensic science. Wiley, Chichester

MATH CrossRef Thompson WC, Taroni F, Aitken CGG (2003) How the probability of a false positive affects the value of DNA evidence. J Forensic Sci 48:47–54

Triggs C, Buckleton JS (2003) The two trace transfer problem re-examined. Sci Just 43:127–134

CrossRef Weir BS (2000) Statistical analysis. In: Siegel J, Saukko P, Knupfer G (eds) Encyclopedia of forensic science. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 545–550

CrossRef © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations Simone Gittelson Email author Alex Biedermann Silvia Bozza Franco Taroni 1. Institut de Police Scientifique, Ecole des Sciences Criminelles Université de Lausanne Lausanne Switzerland 2. Dipartimento di Economia Università Ca’ Foscari di Venezia Venezia Italy