Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBuckleton, John S
dc.contributor.authorBright, Jo-Anne
dc.contributor.authorCheng, Kevin
dc.contributor.authorKelly, Hannah
dc.contributor.authorTaylor, Duncan A
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-30T01:43:36Z
dc.date.available2018-11-30T01:43:36Z
dc.date.issued2018-11-12
dc.identifier.citationBuckleton, J. S., Bright, J.-A., Cheng, K., Kelly, H., & Taylor, D. A. (2019). The effect of varying the number of contributors in the prosecution and alternate propositions. Forensic Science International: Genetics, 38, 225–231.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1872-4973
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2328/38628
dc.descriptionThis manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This author accepted manuscript is made available following 12 month embargo from date of publication (November 2018) in accordance with the publisher’s archiving policyen_US
dc.description.abstractUsing a simplified model, we examine the effect of varying the number of contributors in the prosecution and alternate propositions for a number of simulated examples. We compare the Slooten and Caliebe [1] solution, with several existing practices. Our own experience is that most laboratories, and ourselves, assign the number of contributors, N = n, by allele count and a manual examination of peak heights. The LRn for one or a very few values is calculated and typically one of these is presented, usually the most conservative. This gives an acceptable approximation. Reassessing the number of contributors if LR = 0 and adding one to N under both Hp and Ha to “fit” the POI may lead to a substantial overstatement of the LR. A more reasonable option is to allow optimisation of the assignment under Hp and Ha separately. We show that an additional contributor explained the single locus profile better when PHR≥0.51. This is pleasingly in line with current interpretation approaches. Collectively these trials, and the solid theoretical development, suggest that the Slooten and Caliebe approach preforms well.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work was supported in part by grant 2017-DN-BX-K541 from the US National Institute of Justice.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.rights© 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_US
dc.subjectDNA mixture interpretationen_US
dc.subjectNumber of contributorsen_US
dc.subjectSlooten and Caliebeen_US
dc.titleThe effect of varying the number of contributors in the prosecution and alternate propositionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.11.011en_US
dc.rights.holder© 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.rights.licenseCC-BY-NC-ND
local.contributor.authorOrcidLookupTaylor, Duncan A: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0633-7424


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record