Evett I W, Scranage J, Pinchin R
Central Research and Support Establishment, Forensic Science Service, Reading, Berks, England.
Am J Hum Genet. 1993 Mar;52(3):498-505.
The debate about the statistics of DNA profiling in forensic science casework has been carried out mainly from the perspective which is generally known as "match/binning." This approach has an initial appeal because of its apparent conceptual simplicity. However, the simplicity is illusory because it encourages misconceptions which obscure the essential forensic issues. This is exemplified in a recent report of the National Research Council, which places great emphasis on the need for conservative estimation of relative frequencies while missing the point that the power of RFLP technology cannot be realized if the matching stage is inefficient. Our approach to the problem is a one-stage rather than a two-stage process, by means of one function--the likelihood ratio--which determines the evidential strength. This paper describes experiments which have been carried out to assess the power of the method in forensic science and compares it with match/binning methodology. Tests for gauging the effects of between-probe dependence are included, with the results complementing those of Risch and Devlin.
法医学案件工作中关于DNA图谱统计的争论主要是从一种通常被称为“匹配/分箱”的角度展开的。这种方法因其表面上概念简单而颇具吸引力。然而,这种简单是虚幻的,因为它助长了一些误解,这些误解掩盖了关键的法医学问题。美国国家研究委员会最近的一份报告就是例证,该报告非常强调保守估计相对频率的必要性,却忽略了一个要点:如果匹配阶段效率低下,限制性片段长度多态性(RFLP)技术的效力就无法实现。我们解决这个问题的方法是一个单阶段而非两阶段的过程,借助一个函数——似然比,它决定了证据的强度。本文描述了为评估该方法在法医学中的效力而进行的实验,并将其与匹配/分箱方法进行了比较。其中包括用于衡量探针间依赖性影响的测试,结果补充了里施和德夫林的研究结果。