Evaluation of distance-based approaches for forensic comparison: Application to hand odor evidence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.09126v1
• Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 07:41:53 GMT
• Title: Evaluation of distance-based approaches for forensic comparison: Application to hand odor evidence
• Authors: Isabelle Rivals (UMRS, ESPCI Paris), C\'edric Sautier (IRCGN), Guillaume Cognon, Vincent Cuzuel
• Abstract summary: We focus on distance-based approaches, whose robustness and specifically their capacity to deal with high-dimensional evidence are very different. Direct and indirect methods are compared in terms of sensitivity, specificity and robustness, with and without feature selection. Empirical evaluations on a large panel of 534 subjects and their 1690 odor traces show the significant superiority of the indirect methods.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The issue of distinguishing between the same-source and different-source hypotheses based on various types of traces is a generic problem in forensic science. This problem is often tackled with Bayesian approaches, which are able to provide a likelihood ratio that quantifies the relative strengths of evidence supporting each of the two competing hypotheses. Here, we focus on distance-based approaches, whose robustness and specifically whose capacity to deal with high-dimensional evidence are very different, and need to be evaluated and optimized. A unified framework for direct methods based on estimating the likelihoods of the distance between traces under each of the two competing hypotheses, and indirect methods using logistic regression to discriminate between same-source and different-source distance distributions, is presented. Whilst direct methods are more flexible, indirect methods are more robust and quite natural in machine learning. Moreover, indirect methods also enable the use of a vectorial distance, thus preventing the severe information loss suffered by scalar distance approaches.Direct and indirect methods are compared in terms of sensitivity, specificity and robustness, with and without dimensionality reduction, with and without feature selection, on the example of hand odor profiles, a novel and challenging type of evidence in the field of forensics. Empirical evaluations on a large panel of 534 subjects and their 1690 odor traces show the significant superiority of the indirect methods, especially without dimensionality reduction, be it with or without feature selection.

Related papers

• Measuring the Reliability of Causal Probing Methods: Tradeoffs, Limitations, and the Plight of Nullifying Interventions [3.173096780177902]
  Causal probing is an approach to interpreting foundation models, such as large language models. We propose a general empirical analysis framework to evaluate the reliability of causal probing interventions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T03:45:49Z)
• Embedding Trajectory for Out-of-Distribution Detection in Mathematical Reasoning [50.84938730450622]
  We propose a trajectory-based method TV score, which uses trajectory volatility for OOD detection in mathematical reasoning. Our method outperforms all traditional algorithms on GLMs under mathematical reasoning scenarios. Our method can be extended to more applications with high-density features in output spaces, such as multiple-choice questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-22T22:22:25Z)
• A Generalization Theory of Cross-Modality Distillation with Contrastive Learning [49.35244441141323]
  Cross-modality distillation arises as an important topic for data modalities containing limited knowledge. We formulate a general framework of cross-modality contrastive distillation (CMCD), built upon contrastive learning. Our algorithm outperforms existing algorithms consistently by a margin of 2-3% across diverse modalities and tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-06T11:05:13Z)
• DINER: Debiasing Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis with Multi-variable Causal Inference [21.929902181609936]
  We propose a novel framework based on multi-variable causal inference for debiasing ABSA. For the review branch, the bias is modeled as indirect confounding from context, where backdoor adjustment intervention is employed for debiasing. For the aspect branch, the bias is described as a direct correlation with labels, where counterfactual reasoning is adopted for debiasing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-02T10:38:31Z)
• Towards stable real-world equation discovery with assessing differentiating quality influence [52.2980614912553]
  We propose alternatives to the commonly used finite differences-based method. We evaluate these methods in terms of applicability to problems, similar to the real ones, and their ability to ensure the convergence of equation discovery algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-09T23:32:06Z)
• Disentangled Representation for Causal Mediation Analysis [25.114619307838602]
  Causal mediation analysis is a method that is often used to reveal direct and indirect effects. Deep learning shows promise in mediation analysis, but the current methods only assume latent confounders that affect treatment, mediator and outcome simultaneously. We propose the Disentangled Mediation Analysis Variational AutoEncoder (DMAVAE), which disentangles the representations of latent confounders into three types to accurately estimate the natural direct effect, natural indirect effect and total effect.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-19T23:37:17Z)
• Few-shot Forgery Detection via Guided Adversarial Interpolation [56.59499187594308]
  Existing forgery detection methods suffer from significant performance drops when applied to unseen novel forgery approaches. We propose Guided Adversarial Interpolation (GAI) to overcome the few-shot forgery detection problem. Our method is validated to be robust to choices of majority and minority forgery approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-12T16:05:10Z)
• Evaluating Causal Inference Methods [0.4588028371034407]
  We introduce a deep generative model-based framework, Credence, to validate causal inference methods. Our work introduces a deep generative model-based framework, Credence, to validate causal inference methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-09T00:21:22Z)
• Deblurring via Stochastic Refinement [85.42730934561101]
  We present an alternative framework for blind deblurring based on conditional diffusion models. Our method is competitive in terms of distortion metrics such as PSNR.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-05T04:36:09Z)
• DEMI: Discriminative Estimator of Mutual Information [5.248805627195347]
  Estimating mutual information between continuous random variables is often intractable and challenging for high-dimensional data. Recent progress has leveraged neural networks to optimize variational lower bounds on mutual information. Our approach is based on training a classifier that provides the probability that a data sample pair is drawn from the joint distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-05T04:19:27Z)
• Rethink Maximum Mean Discrepancy for Domain Adaptation [77.2560592127872]
  This paper theoretically proves two essential facts: 1) minimizing the Maximum Mean Discrepancy equals to maximize the source and target intra-class distances respectively but jointly minimize their variance with some implicit weights, so that the feature discriminability degrades. Experiments on several benchmark datasets not only prove the validity of theoretical results but also demonstrate that our approach could perform better than the comparative state-of-art methods substantially.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-01T18:25:10Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.