A response to the UK position statement on forensic speaker comparison

[1]  Philip Harrison,et al.  F0 STATISTICS FOR 100 YOUNG MALE SPEAKERS OF STANDARD SOUTHERN BRITISH ENGLISH , 2007 .

[2]  T. Bayes.  An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances , 2003 .

[3]  Ian W. Evett,et al.  The interpretation of refractive index measurements V. , 1977 .

[4]  Colin Aitken,et al.  Evaluation of trace evidence in the form of multivariate data , 2004 .

[5]  Claude Roux,et al.  Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists, by Colin G. G. Aitken and Franco Taroni 2nd edition. John Wiley and Sons, 2004. , 2006 .

[6]  Peter French,et al.  Position Statement concerning use of impressionistic likelihood terms in forensic speaker comparison cases, with a foreword by Peter French & Philip Harrison , 2007 .

[7]  R. Gombrich,et al.  Assessing the evidence. , 2009, Occasional paper.

[8]  Harry Hollien,et al.  The Phonetic Bases of Speaker Recognition by Francis Nolan , 1985 .

[9]  I. Evett,et al.  Interpreting DNA Evidence: Statistical Genetics for Forensic Scientists , 1998 .

[10]  Ian W. Evett,et al.  Interpreting DNA Evidence: A Review , 2003 .

[11]  Madhuri S. Mulekar,et al.  Weight-of Evidence for Forensic DNA Profiles , 2008, Technometrics.

[12]  Francis Nolan,et al.  A Forensic Phonetic Study of 'Dynamic' Sources of Variability in Speech: The DyViS Project , 2006 .

[13]  Philip Rose,et al.  Forensic Speaker Recognition at the Beginning of the Twenty-First Century - An Overview and a Demonstration , 2005 .

[14]  Phil Rose,et al.  Technical forensic speaker recognition: Evaluation, types and testing of evidence , 2006, Comput. Speech Lang..

[15]  M. Healy,et al.  Populations and samples. , 1991, Archives of disease in childhood.

[16]  Colin Aitken,et al.  The use of statistics in forensic science , 1991 .

[17]  S. Pinker.  The Language Instinct , 1994 .

[18]  C. Aitken,et al.  Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists: Aitken/Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists , 2005 .

[19]  David Lucy,et al.  Introduction to Statistics for Forensic Scientists , 2005 .

[20]  Peter Donnelly,et al.  Appealing statistics. , 2007, Medicine, science, and the law.

[21]  W. Thompson,et al.  Interpretation of statistical evidence in criminal trials , 1987 .

[22]  Franco Taroni,et al.  Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists , 2004 .

[23]  I. W. Evett,et al.  Towards a uniform framework for reporting opinions in forensic science casework , 1998 .

[24]  D. Hand,et al.  Idiot's Bayes—Not So Stupid After All? , 2001 .

[25]  Pascal Druyts,et al.  Applying Logistic Regression to the Fusion of the NIST'99 1-Speaker Submissions , 2000, Digit. Signal Process..

[26]  Michael Jessen,et al.  Forensic phonetics , 1991, Journal of Linguistics.

[27]  Claude Roux,et al.  Review of : Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists, 2nd Ed. , 2005 .

[28]  J. Koehler,et al.  The Coming Paradigm Shift in Forensic Identification Science , 2005, Science.

[29]  Douglas A. Reynolds,et al.  Speaker Verification Using Adapted Gaussian Mixture Models , 2000, Digit. Signal Process..

[30]  Philip Rose,et al.  The Technical Comparison of Forensic Voice Samples , 2003 .

[31]  Javier Ortega-Garcia,et al.  Robust estimation, interpretation and assessment of likelihood ratios in forensic speaker recognition , 2006, Comput. Speech Lang..

[32]  Doroteo Torre Toledano,et al.  Emulating DNA: Rigorous Quantification of Evidential Weight in Transparent and Testable Forensic Speaker Recognition , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing.

[33]  Didier Meuwly,et al.  The inference of identity in forensic speaker recognition , 2000, Speech Commun..

[34]  J A Lambert,et al.  The impact of the principles of evidence interpretation on the structure and content of statements. , 2000, Science & justice : journal of the Forensic Science Society.

[35]  Philip Rose.  Forensic Speaker Identification , 2002 .