|کد مقاله||کد نشریه||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||نسخه تمام متن|
|6463366||1362098||2017||3 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||دانلود کنید|
- The position papers under discussion commit serious statistical errors.
- Estimates of the likelihood ratio have ignored relevant evidence in the case.
- It is unclear what data to use when assessing uncertainty about such an estimate.
This article is a response to the position papers published in the Science & Justice virtual special issue on measuring and reporting the precision of forensic likelihood ratios. I point out a number of serious statistical errors in some of these papers. These issues need to be properly addressed before the philosophical debate can be conducted in earnest.
Journal: Science & Justice - Volume 57, Issue 1, January 2017, Pages 73-75