Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Journal of Legal Medicine 1/2016

01-01-2016 | Original Article

Exclusion probabilities and likelihood ratios with applications to mixtures

Authors: Klaas-Jan Slooten, Thore Egeland

Published in: International Journal of Legal Medicine | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

The statistical evidence obtained from mixed DNA profiles can be summarised in several ways in forensic casework including the likelihood ratio (LR) and the Random Man Not Excluded (RMNE) probability. The literature has seen a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of likelihood ratios and exclusion probabilities, and part of our aim is to bring some clarification to this debate. In a previous paper, we proved that there is a general mathematical relationship between these statistics: RMNE can be expressed as a certain average of the LR, implying that the expected value of the LR, when applied to an actual contributor to the mixture, is at least equal to the inverse of the RMNE. While the mentioned paper presented applications for kinship problems, the current paper demonstrates the relevance for mixture cases, and for this purpose, we prove some new general properties. We also demonstrate how to use the distribution of the likelihood ratio for donors of a mixture, to obtain estimates for exceedance probabilities of the LR for non-donors, of which the RMNE is a special case corresponding to LR>0. In order to derive these results, we need to view the likelihood ratio as a random variable. In this paper, we describe how such a randomization can be achieved. The RMNE is usually invoked only for mixtures without dropout. In mixtures, artefacts like dropout and drop-in are commonly encountered and we address this situation too, illustrating our results with a basic but widely implemented model, a so-called binary model. The precise definitions, modelling and interpretation of the required concepts of dropout and drop-in are not entirely obvious, and we attempt to clarify them here in a general likelihood framework for a binary model.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Balding D, Buckleton J (2009) Interpreting low template DNA profiles. Forensic Sci Int Genet 4(1):1–10CrossRef Balding D, Buckleton J (2009) Interpreting low template DNA profiles. Forensic Sci Int Genet 4(1):1–10CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Buckleton J, Curran J (2008) A discussion of the merits of random man not excluded and likelihood ratios. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2:343–348CrossRef Buckleton J, Curran J (2008) A discussion of the merits of random man not excluded and likelihood ratios. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2:343–348CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Buckleton J, Triggs C, Walsh S (eds.) (2005) Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation. CRC Press, Florida, USA Buckleton J, Triggs C, Walsh S (eds.) (2005) Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation. CRC Press, Florida, USA
4.
go back to reference Cowell R, Graversen T, Lauritzen S, Mortera J (2015) Analysis of forensic DNA mixtures with artefacts. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat 64(1):1–48CrossRef Cowell R, Graversen T, Lauritzen S, Mortera J (2015) Analysis of forensic DNA mixtures with artefacts. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat 64(1):1–48CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Curran J, Gill P, Bill M (2005) Interpretation of repeat measurement DNA evidence allowing for multiple contributors and population substructure. Forensic Sci Int 148 (1):47–53CrossRef Curran J, Gill P, Bill M (2005) Interpretation of repeat measurement DNA evidence allowing for multiple contributors and population substructure. Forensic Sci Int 148 (1):47–53CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Dørum G, Kling D, Baeza-Richer C, Magariṅos MG, Sæbø S, Desmyter S, Egeland T (2014) Models and implementation for relationship problems with dropout. Int J Leg Med 129(3):411–423CrossRef Dørum G, Kling D, Baeza-Richer C, Magariṅos MG, Sæbø S, Desmyter S, Egeland T (2014) Models and implementation for relationship problems with dropout. Int J Leg Med 129(3):411–423CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Gill P, Gusmão L, Haned H, Mayr W, Morling N, Parson W, Prieto L, Prinz M, Schneider H, Schneider P, Weir B (2012) DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: Recommendations on the evaluation of STR typing results that may include drop-out and/or drop-in using probabilistic methods. Forensic Sci Int Genet 6 (6):679–688CrossRef Gill P, Gusmão L, Haned H, Mayr W, Morling N, Parson W, Prieto L, Prinz M, Schneider H, Schneider P, Weir B (2012) DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics: Recommendations on the evaluation of STR typing results that may include drop-out and/or drop-in using probabilistic methods. Forensic Sci Int Genet 6 (6):679–688CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Gill P, Haned H (2013) A new methodological framework to interpret complex DNA profiles using likelihood ratios. Forensic Sci Int Genet 7:251–263CrossRef Gill P, Haned H (2013) A new methodological framework to interpret complex DNA profiles using likelihood ratios. Forensic Sci Int Genet 7:251–263CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Haned H, Slooten K, Gill P (2012) Exploratory data analysis for the interpretation of low template DNA mixtures. Forensic Sci Int Genet 6(6):762–774CrossRef Haned H, Slooten K, Gill P (2012) Exploratory data analysis for the interpretation of low template DNA mixtures. Forensic Sci Int Genet 6(6):762–774CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Kruijver M (2015) Efficient computations with the likelihood ratio distribution. Forensic Sci Int Genet 14:116–124CrossRef Kruijver M (2015) Efficient computations with the likelihood ratio distribution. Forensic Sci Int Genet 14:116–124CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Kruijver M, Meester R, Slooten K (2015) P-values should not be used for evaluating the strength of DNA evidence. Forensic Sci Int Genet 16:226–231CrossRef Kruijver M, Meester R, Slooten K (2015) P-values should not be used for evaluating the strength of DNA evidence. Forensic Sci Int Genet 16:226–231CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Nothnagel M, Schmidtke J, Krawczak M (2010) Potentials and limits of pairwise kinship analysis using autosomal short tandem repeat loci. Int J Legal Med 124(3):205–215CrossRef Nothnagel M, Schmidtke J, Krawczak M (2010) Potentials and limits of pairwise kinship analysis using autosomal short tandem repeat loci. Int J Legal Med 124(3):205–215CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Slooten K, Meester R (2011) Forensic identification: the Island Problem and its generalizations. Statistica Neerlandica 65:202–237CrossRef Slooten K, Meester R (2011) Forensic identification: the Island Problem and its generalizations. Statistica Neerlandica 65:202–237CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Slooten K, Egeland T (2014) Exclusion probabilities and likelihood ratios with applications to kinship problems. Int J Legal Med 128(3):415–425CrossRef Slooten K, Egeland T (2014) Exclusion probabilities and likelihood ratios with applications to kinship problems. Int J Legal Med 128(3):415–425CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Slooten K, Meester R (2014) Probabilistic strategies for familial DNA searching. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat 63(3):361–384CrossRef Slooten K, Meester R (2014) Probabilistic strategies for familial DNA searching. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat 63(3):361–384CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Steele C, Balding D (2014) Statistical evaluation of forensic DNA profile evidence. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application 1:361–384CrossRef Steele C, Balding D (2014) Statistical evaluation of forensic DNA profile evidence. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application 1:361–384CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Thompson E (2000) Statistical inference from genetic data on pedigrees. In: NSF-CBMS regional conference series in probability and statistics. JSTOR Thompson E (2000) Statistical inference from genetic data on pedigrees. In: NSF-CBMS regional conference series in probability and statistics. JSTOR
18.
go back to reference Westen A, Kraaijenbrink T, de Medina AR, Harteveld J, Willemse P, Zuniga S, van der Gaag K, Weiler N, Warnaar J, Kayser M, Sijen T, de Knijff P (2014) Comparing six commercial autosomal STR kits in a large Dutch population sample. Forensic Sci Int Genet 10:55–63CrossRef Westen A, Kraaijenbrink T, de Medina AR, Harteveld J, Willemse P, Zuniga S, van der Gaag K, Weiler N, Warnaar J, Kayser M, Sijen T, de Knijff P (2014) Comparing six commercial autosomal STR kits in a large Dutch population sample. Forensic Sci Int Genet 10:55–63CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Exclusion probabilities and likelihood ratios with applications to mixtures
Authors
Klaas-Jan Slooten
Thore Egeland
Publication date
01-01-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
International Journal of Legal Medicine / Issue 1/2016
Print ISSN: 0937-9827
Electronic ISSN: 1437-1596
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-015-1217-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

International Journal of Legal Medicine 1/2016 Go to the issue