The logical foundations of forensic science: towards reliable knowledge

The greatest contribution to medical science is the transformation from studying symptoms to studying their causes-the unrelenting legacy of Robert Koch and Louis Pasteur-and a causality perspective to approach a definition of SLE

The basic initiative related to this study is derived from the fact that systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a unique and fertile system science subject. We are, however, still far from understanding its nature. It may be fair to indicate that we are spending more time and resources on studying the complexity of classified SLE than studying the validity of classification criteria. This study represents a theoretical analysis of current instinctual SLE classification criteria based on "the causality principle." The discussion has its basis on the radical scientific traditions introduced by Robert Koch and Louis Pasteur. They announced significant changes in our thinking of disease etiology through the implementation of the modern version of "the causality principle." They influenced all aspects of today's medical concepts and research: the transformation of medical science from studies of symptoms to study their causes, relevant for monosymptomatic diseases as for syndromes. Their studies focused on bacteria as causes of infectious diseases and on how the immune system adapts to control and prevent contagious spreading. This is the most significant paradigm shift in the modern history of medicine and resulted in radical changes in our view of the immune system. They described acquired post-infection immunity and active immunization by antigen-specific vaccines. The paradigm "transformation" has a great theoretical impact also on current studies of autoimmune diseases like SLE: symptoms and their cause(s). In this study, the evolution of SLE classification and diagnostic criteria is discussed from "the causality principle" perspective, and if contemporary SLE classification criteria are as useful as believed today for SLE research. This skepticism is based on the fact that classification criteria are not selected based on cogent causal strategies. The SLE classification criteria do not harmonize with Koch's and Pasteur's causality principle paradigms and not with Witebsky's Koch-derived postulates for autoimmune and infectious diseases. It is not established whether the classification criteria can separate SLE as a "one disease entity" from "SLE-like non-SLE disorders"-the latter in terms of SLE imitations. This is discussed here in terms of weight, rank, and impact of the classification criteria: Do they all originate from "one basic causal etiology"? Probably not.

SLE classification criteria: Is "The causality principle" integrated and operative - and do the molecular and genetical network, on which criteria depend on, support the definition of SLE as "a one disease entity" - A theoretical discussion

Molecular and cellular aspects of the autoimmune pathophysiology in SLE is linked to the "The causality principle". SLE Classification Criteria identify per definition disease measures (here: synonymous with classification criteria), but not diagnostic criteria within a classical framework. These two mostly theoretical criteria collections represent a salient conflict between phenomenology and the causality principle - between disease measures and molecular interactions that promote such measures, in other words their cause(s). Essentially, each criterion evolves from immunogenic and inflammatory signals - some are interconnected, some are not. Disparate signals instigated by disparate causes. These may promote clinically heterogenous SLE cohorts with respect to organ affection, autoimmunity, and disease course. There is today no concise measures or arguments that settle whether SLE cohorts evolve from one decisive etiological factor (homogenous cohorts), or if disparate patho-biological factors promote SLE (heterogenous cohorts). Current SLE cohorts are not ideal substrates to serve as study objects if the research aims are to describe etiology, and molecular interactions that cause - and link - primary and secondary pathophysiological events together - events that account for early and progressive SLE. We have to develop SLE criteria allowing us to identify definable categories of SLE in order to describe etiology, pathophysiology and diagnostic criteria of delimitated SLE versions. In this regard, the causality principle is central to define dominant etiologies of individual SLE categories, and subsequent and consequent down-stream diagnostic disease measures. In this sense, we may whether we like it or not identify different SLE categories like "genuine SLE" and "SLE-like non-SLE" syndromes. Many aspects of this problem are thoroughly discussed in this study.

Mixed cumulative probit: a multivariate generalization of transition analysis that accommodates variation in the shape, spread and structure of data

Biological data are frequently nonlinear, heteroscedastic and conditionally dependent, and often researchers deal with missing data. To account for characteristics common in biological data in one algorithm, we developed the mixed cumulative probit (MCP), a novel latent trait model that is a formal generalization of the cumulative probit model usually used in transition analysis. Specifically, the MCP accommodates heteroscedasticity, mixtures of ordinal and continuous variables, missing values, conditional dependence and alternative specifications of the mean response and noise response. Cross-validation selects the best model parameters (mean response and the noise response for simple models, as well as conditional dependence for multivariate models), and the Kullback-Leibler divergence evaluates information gain during posterior inference to quantify mis-specified models (conditionally dependent versus conditionally independent). Two continuous and four ordinal skeletal and dental variables collected from 1296 individuals (aged birth to 22 years) from the Subadult Virtual Anthropology Database are used to introduce and demonstrate the algorithm. In addition to describing the features of the MCP, we provide material to help fit novel datasets using the MCP. The flexible, general formulation with model selection provides a process to robustly identify the modelling assumptions that are best suited for the data at hand.

Race as technology and the carceral methodologies of molecular racialization

This article counters the view (albeit contested) of race as a natural empirical object with technology as a secondary, external entity applied to it. Instead, I posit race itself as a technology that is inherently discriminatory in motivation, design and function, as evident throughout its brutally effective history. Focusing on the post/genomic era, I consider contemporary forms of molecular racialization as the latest technological iteration of race as a disciplinary device. I characterize this biopolitical racial technology as operant through a carceral methodology in four stages: (a) the epistemological mutability of molecular racialization as reiterating the obscurantist claim of modern raciology to constitute a benign description of literal racial difference; (b) the ontological de-individualization of certain racial others as aggregated risky populations and legitimate targets of repressive management; (c) a predictive empiricism whereby molecular race is seen as indicative of potential behaviours that sanctions oppressive state interventions against specific populations; (d) a normative bioethical dissembling whereby state agencies' exploitation of target molecular racialized populations' vulnerabilities result in the debarment of proper ethical consideration and the right to justice. Drawing largely on criminal justice and immigration control examples, the article asserts that the carceral methodologies of molecular racialization demonstrate race as a repressive technology designed to (re)produce subaltern racial populations and propagate racism.

Providing a Forensic Expert Opinion on the "Degree of Force": Evidentiary Considerations

Forensic pathologists and anthropologists are often asked in court for an opinion about the degree of force required to cause a specific injury. This paper examines and discusses the concept of 'degree of force' and why it is considered a pertinent issue in legal proceedings. This discussion identifies the implicit assumptions that often underpin questions about the 'degree of force'. The current knowledge base for opinions on the degree of force is then provided by means of a literature review. A critical appraisal of this literature shows that much of the results from experimental research is of limited value in routine casework. An alternative approach to addressing the issue is provided through a discussion of the application of Bayes' theorem, also called the likelihood ratio framework. It is argued that the use of this framework makes it possible for an expert to provide relevant and specific evidence, whilst maintaining the boundaries of their field of expertise.

In the context of forensic casework, are there meaningful metrics of the degree of calibration?

Forensic-evaluation systems should output likelihood-ratio values that are well calibrated. If they do not, their output will be misleading. Unless a forensic-evaluation system is intrinsically well-calibrated, it should be calibrated using a parsimonious parametric model that is trained using calibration data. The system should then be tested using validation data. Metrics of degree of calibration that are based on the pool-adjacent-violators (PAV) algorithm recalibrate the likelihood-ratio values calculated from the validation data. The PAV algorithm overfits on the validation data because it is both trained and tested on the validation data, and because it is a non-parametric model with weak constraints. For already-calibrated systems, PAV-based ostensive metrics of degree of calibration do not actually measure degree of calibration; they measure sampling variability between the calibration data and the validation data, and overfitting on the validation data. Monte Carlo simulations are used to demonstrate that this is the case. We therefore argue that, in the context of casework, PAV-based metrics are not meaningful metrics of degree of calibration; however, we also argue that, in the context of casework, a metric of degree of calibration is not required.

Forensic science and the principle of excluded middle: "Inconclusive" decisions and the structure of error rate studies

In a paper published recently in this journal, Dror and Scurich (2020) [20] critically discuss the notions of "inconclusive evidence" (i.e., test items for which it is difficult to render a categorical response) and "inconclusive decisions" (i.e., experts' conclusions or responses) in the context of forensic science error rate studies. They expose several ways in which the understanding and use of "inconclusives" in current forensic science research and practice can adversely affect the outcomes of error rate studies. A main cause of distortion, according to Dror and Scurich, is what they call "erroneous inconclusive" decisions, in particular the lack of acknowledgment of this type of erroneous conclusion in the computation of error rates. To overcome this complication, Dror and Scurich call for a more explicit monitoring of "inconclusives" using a modified error rate study design. Whilst we agree with several well-argued points raised by the authors, we disagree with their framing of "inconclusive decisions" as potential errors. In this paper, we argue that referring to an "inconclusive decision" as an error is a contradiction in terms, runs counter to an analysis based on decision logic and, hence, is questionable as a concept. We also reiterate that the very term "inconclusive decision" disregards the procedural architecture of the criminal justice system across modern jurisdictions, especially the fact that forensic experts have no decisional rights in the criminal process. These positions do not ignore the possibility that "inconclusives" - if used excessively - do raise problems in forensic expert reporting, in particular limited assertiveness (or, overcautiousness). However, these drawbacks derive from inherent limitations of experts rather than from the seemingly erroneous nature of "inconclusives" that needs to be fixed. More fundamentally, we argue that attempts to score "inconclusives" as errors amount to philosophical claims disguised as forensic methodology. Specifically, these attempts interfere with the metaphysical substrate underpinning empirical research. We point this out on the basis of the law of the excluded middle, i.e. the principle of "no third possibility being given" (tertium non datur).

Minor or adult? Introducing decision analysis in forensic age estimation

Nowadays, forensic age estimation takes an important role in worldwide forensic and medico-legal institutes that are solicited by judicial or administrative authorities for providing an expert report on the age of individuals. The authorities' ultimate issue of interest is often the probability that the person is younger or older than a given age threshold, which is usually the age of majority. Such information is fundamental for deciding whether a person being judged falls under the legal category of an adult. This is a decision that may have important consequences for the individual, depending on the legal framework in which the decision is made. The aim of this paper is to introduce a normative approach for assisting the authority in the decision-making process given knowledge from available findings reported by means of probabilities. The normative approach proposed here has been acknowledged in the forensic framework, and represents a promising structure for reasoning that can support the decision-making process in forensic age estimation. The paper introduces the fundamental elements of decision theory applied to the specific case of age estimation, and provides some examples to illustrate its practical application.

Non-destructive ZooMS identification reveals strategic bone tool raw material selection by Neandertals

Five nearly identical fragments of specialized bone tools, interpreted as lissoirs (French for “smoothers”), have been found at two Middle Paleolithic sites in southwest France. The finds span three separate archaeological deposits, suggesting continuity in the behavior of late Neandertals. Using standard morphological assessments, we determined that the lissoirs were produced on ribs of medium-sized ungulates. However, since these bones are highly fragmented and anthropogenically modified, species determinations were challenging. Also, conservative curation policy recommends minimizing destructive sampling of rare, fragile, or small artifacts for molecular identification methods. To better understand raw material selection for these five lissoirs, we reassess their taxonomy using a non-destructive ZooMS methodology based on triboelectric capture of collagen. We sampled four storage containers and obtained identifiable MALDI-TOF MS collagen fingerprints, all indicative of the same taxonomic clade, which includes aurochs and bison (Bos sp. and Bison sp.). The fifth specimen, which was stored in a plastic bag, provided no useful MALDI-TOF MS spectra. We show that the choice of large bovid ribs in an archaeological layer dominated by reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) demonstrates strategic selection by these Neandertals. Furthermore, our results highlight the value of a promising technique for the non-destructive analysis of bone artifacts.

Age estimation by assessment of pulp chamber volume: a Bayesian network for the evaluation of dental evidence

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to investigate the performance of a Bayesian method in the evaluation of dental age-related evidence collected by means of a geometrical approximation procedure of the pulp chamber volume. Measurement of this volume was based on three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography images.

METHODS

The Bayesian method was applied by means of a probabilistic graphical model, namely a Bayesian network. Performance of that method was investigated in terms of accuracy and bias of the decisional outcomes. Influence of an informed elicitation of the prior belief of chronological age was also studied by means of a sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Outcomes in terms of accuracy were adequate with standard requirements for forensic adult age estimation. Findings also indicated that the Bayesian method does not show a particular tendency towards under- or overestimation of the age variable. Outcomes of the sensitivity analysis showed that results on estimation are improved with a ration elicitation of the prior probabilities of age.

Finding the way forward for forensic science in the US-A commentary on the PCAST report

A recent report by the US President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), (2016) has made a number of recommendations for the future development of forensic science. Whereas we all agree that there is much need for change, we find that the PCAST report recommendations are founded on serious misunderstandings. We explain the traditional forensic paradigms of match and identification and the more recent foundation of the logical approach to evidence evaluation. This forms the groundwork for exposing many sources of confusion in the PCAST report. We explain how the notion of treating the scientist as a black box and the assignment of evidential weight through error rates is overly restrictive and misconceived. Our own view sees inferential logic, the development of calibrated knowledge and understanding of scientists as the core of the advance of the profession.

Evaluation of Forensic DNA Traces When Propositions of Interest Relate to Activities: Analysis and Discussion of Recurrent Concerns

When forensic scientists evaluate and report on the probative strength of single DNA traces, they commonly rely on only one number, expressing the rarity of the DNA profile in the population of interest. This is so because the focus is on propositions regarding the source of the recovered trace material, such as "the person of interest is the source of the crime stain." In particular, when the alternative proposition is "an unknown person is the source of the crime stain," one is directed to think about the rarity of the profile. However, in the era of DNA profiling technology capable of producing results from small quantities of trace material (i.e., non-visible staining) that is subject to easy and ubiquitous modes of transfer, the issue of source is becoming less central, to the point that it is often not contested. There is now a shift from the question "whose DNA is this?" to the question "how did it get there?" As a consequence, recipients of expert information are now very much in need of assistance with the evaluation of the meaning and probative strength of DNA profiling results when the competing propositions of interest refer to different activities. This need is widely demonstrated in day-to-day forensic practice and is also voiced in specialized literature. Yet many forensic scientists remain reluctant to assess their results given propositions that relate to different activities. Some scientists consider evaluations beyond the issue of source as being overly speculative, because of the lack of relevant data and knowledge regarding phenomena and mechanisms of transfer, persistence and background of DNA. Similarly, encouragements to deal with these activity issues, expressed in a recently released European guideline on evaluative reporting (Willis et al., 2015), which highlights the need for rethinking current practice, are sometimes viewed skeptically or are not considered feasible. In this discussion paper, we select and discuss recurrent skeptical views brought to our attention, as well as some of the alternative solutions that have been suggested. We will argue that the way forward is to address now, rather than later, the challenges associated with the evaluation of DNA results (from small quantities of trace material) in light of different activities to prevent them being misrepresented in court.

Intra-individual gait pattern variability in specific situations: Implications for forensic gait analysis

In this study, inter- and intra-individual gait pattern differences are examined in various gait situations by means of phase diagrams of the extremity angles (cyclograms). 8 test subjects walked along a walking distance of 6m under different conditions three times each: barefoot, wearing sneakers, wearing combat boots, after muscular fatigue, and wearing a full-face motorcycle helmet restricting vision. The joint angles of foot, knee, and hip were recorded in the sagittal plane. The coupling of movements was represented by time-adjusted cyclograms, and the inter- and intra-individual differences were captured by calculating the similarity between different gait patterns. Gait pattern variability was often greater between the defined test situations than between the individual test subjects. The results have been interpreted considering neurophysiological regulation mechanisms. Footwear, masking, and fatigue were interpreted as disturbance parameters, each being a cause for gait pattern variability and complicating the inference of identity of persons in video recordings.