Using continuous DNA interpretation methods to revisit likelihood ratio behaviour.

Continuous DNA interpretation systems make use of more information from DNA profiles than analysts have previously been able to with binary, threshold based systems. With these new continuous DNA interpretation systems and a new, more powerful, DNA profiling kit (GlobalFiler) there is an opportunity to re-examine the behaviour of a commonly used statistic in forensic science, the likelihood ratio (LR). The theoretical behaviour of the LR has been known for some time, although in many instances the behaviour has not been able to be thoroughly demonstrated due to limitations of the biological and mathematical models being used. In this paper the effects of profile complexity, replicate amplifications, assuming contributors, adding incorrect information, and adding irrelevant information to the calculation of the LR are explored. The empirical results are compared to theoretical expectations and explained. The work finishes with the results being used to dispel common misconceptions around reliability, accuracy, informativeness and reproducibility.

[1]  Niels Morling,et al.  Analysis of matches and partial-matches in a Danish STR data set. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[2]  James Curran,et al.  A graphical simulation model of the entire DNA process associated with the analysis of short tandem repeat loci , 2005, Nucleic acids research.

[3]  Peter Gill,et al.  Composite profiles in DNA analysis. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[4]  W. Cleveland LOWESS: A Program for Smoothing Scatterplots by Robust Locally Weighted Regression , 1981 .

[5]  James Curran,et al.  Searching mixed DNA profiles directly against profile databases. , 2014, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[6]  W. Cleveland Robust Locally Weighted Regression and Smoothing Scatterplots , 1979 .

[7]  Duncan Taylor,et al.  Developing allelic and stutter peak height models for a continuous method of DNA interpretation. , 2013, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[8]  J Buckleton,et al.  An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STRs derived from less than 100 pg of DNA. , 2000, Forensic science international.

[9]  Peter Gill,et al.  A comparison of stochastic variation in mixed and unmixed casework and synthetic samples. , 2012, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[10]  I W Evett,et al.  A guide to interpreting single locus profiles of DNA mixtures in forensic cases. , 1991, Journal - Forensic Science Society.

[11]  Jo-Anne Bright,et al.  Examination of the variability in mixed DNA profile parameters for the Identifiler multiplex. , 2010, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[12]  Duncan Taylor,et al.  Degradation of forensic DNA profiles , 2013 .

[13]  Duncan Taylor,et al.  The interpretation of single source and mixed DNA profiles. , 2013, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[14]  Bruce S Weir,et al.  Matching and partially-matching DNA profiles. , 2004, Journal of forensic sciences.

[15]  Jo-Anne Bright,et al.  Determination of the variables affecting mixed MiniFiler™ DNA profiles. , 2011, Forensic science international. Genetics.

[16]  M. Perlin,et al.  Validating TrueAllele® DNA Mixture Interpretation * ,† , 2011, Journal of forensic sciences.