On the evidential value of fingerprints

Fingerprint evidence is routinely used by forensics and law enforcement agencies worldwide to apprehend and convict criminals, a practice in use for over 100 years. The use of fingerprints has been accepted as an infallible proof of identity based on two premises: (i) permanence or persistence, and (ii) uniqueness or individuality. However, in the absence of any theoretical results that establish the uniqueness or individuality of fingerprints, the use of fingerprints in various court proceedings is being questioned. This has raised awareness in the forensics community about the need to quantify the evidential value of fingerprint matching. A few studies that have studied this problem estimate this evidential value in one of two ways: (i) feature modeling, where a statistical (generative) model for fingerprint features, primarily minutiae, is developed which is then used to estimate the matching error and (ii) match score modeling, where a set of match scores obtained over a database is used to estimate the matching error rates. Our focus here is on match score modeling and we develop metrics to evaluate the effectiveness and reliability of the proposed evidential measure. Compared to previous approaches, the proposed measure allows explicit utilization of prior odds. Further, we also incorporate fingerprint image quality to improve the reliability of the estimated evidential value.

[1]  David Stoney,et al.  Measurement of Fingerprint Individuality , 2001 .

[2]  Sargur N. Srihari,et al.  Probability of Random Correspondence for Fingerprints , 2009, IWCF.

[3]  J. Shields Finger Prints , 1967 .

[4]  Colin Aitken,et al.  Data Analysis in Forensic Science: A Bayesian Decision Perspective , 2010 .

[5]  Christophe Champod,et al.  Evidence evaluation in fingerprint comparison and automated fingerprint identification systems--modelling within finger variability. , 2007, Forensic science international.

[6]  Craig I. Watson,et al.  Fingerprint Vendor Technology Evaluation 2003: Summary of Results and Analysis Report , 2004 .

[7]  Sharath Pankanti,et al.  On the individuality fingerprints , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. CVPR 2001.

[8]  Christophe Champod,et al.  Computation of Likelihood Ratios in Fingerprint Identification for Configurations of Any Number of Minutiæ , 2007, Journal of forensic sciences.

[9]  Didier Meuwly,et al.  Computation of Likelihood Ratios in Fingerprint Identification for Configurations of Three Minutiæ , 2006, Journal of forensic sciences.

[10]  Brandon Mayfield,et al.  A Review of the FBI ' s Handling of the Brandon Mayfield Case , 2006 .

[11]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Statistical Models for Assessing the Individuality of Fingerprints , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[12]  John I. Thornton,et al.  A Critical Analysis of Quantitative Fingerprint Individuality Models , 1986 .

[13]  Sargur N. Srihari,et al.  Generative Models for Fingerprint Individuality using Ridge Types , 2007, Third International Symposium on Information Assurance and Security.

[14]  Lyn Haber Experiential or scientific expertise , 2007 .

[15]  Sargur N. Srihari,et al.  Evaluation of Rarity of Fingerprints in Forensics , 2010, NIPS.

[16]  Jiansheng Chen,et al.  A Minutiae-based Fingerprint Individuality Model , 2007, 2007 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[17]  Ralph Norman Haber,et al.  Scientific validation of fingerprint evidence under Daubert , 2007 .

[18]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Beyond Minutiae: A Fingerprint Individuality Model with Pattern, Ridge and Pore Features , 2009, ICB.

[19]  George W. Quinn,et al.  ELFT phase II :: an evaluation of automated latent fingerprint identification technologies , 2009 .