Authors: Jennifer Mnookin, Philip J. Kellman, Itiel Dror,
Gennady Erlikhman, Patrick Garrigan, Tandra Ghose, Everett Metler, Dave
Charlton
Abstract:
The comparison of forensic fingerprint images for purposes
of identification is a complex task that, despite advances in image processing,
still requires highly trained human examiners to achieve adequate levels of
performance.
This project aims to determine more about the relationship
between the measurable, visual dimensions of fingerprint pairs and the level of
comparison difficulty for human examiners, both experts, and to a lesser
degree, novices.
While it is likely that well-trained, experienced examiners
are highly accurate when making positive identifications, it is also clear that
errors still occur.
These experiments showed that experts have substantial,
albeit imperfect, subjective knowledge about the difficulty of print pairs.
Experiments also showed that novices perform very poorly and showed no
consistent pattern of feature use.
Results indicate the plausibility of using objective
fingerprint image metrics to predict expert performance and subjective
assessment of difficulty in fingerprint comparisons.
While further research is necessary, this research provides
strong support for the plausible but previously untested assumption that for
expert fingerprint analysis, difficulty is in significant part a function of
measurable, visual dimensions of print comparison pairs.
At present, there are not validated, objective metrics for
any meaningful step in the comparison process, from the determination of
whether there is sufficient information to warrant a comparison to the final
judgment of match or non-match.
Overall, a more sophisticated understanding of the
relationship between error rate and difficulty should also be extremely
important for the courts in weighing fingerprint evidence.
Further research is necessary to build on these results, but
this research provides significant steps forwards for helping to establish that
error rates are related to difficulty; for beginning to provide validated
evidence for what visual dimensions of fingerprint comparison pairs are
associated with difficulty; and for helping to tease out both examiner’s
metacognitive abilities and the substantial degree of examiner expertise in
this domain.
No comments:
Post a Comment