The Effect of Laundering on the Detection of Acid Phosphatase and Spermatozoa on Cotton T-Shirts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In sexual assault cases, items submitted for forensic analysis are frequently examined for seminal fluid. The contents of a medical examination kit taken from the victim, particularly the genital swabs, are often the main source of associative DNA evidence. Depending on the circumstances, however, the examination of clothing and bedding can also be important. A standard procedure used in searching clothing is to screen for acid phosphatase and to confirm the presence of seminal fluid by examination for spermatozoa. It is frequently assumed that laundering the item in question will remove acid phosphatase and therefore testing for this enzyme is not useful. We have washed and laundered seminal stains on cotton T-shirts in a variety of ways, including dry cleaning. The cleaned fabric was screened for acid phosphatase, and the presence of spermatozoa determined. The DNA content of the cleaned stain was quantified and Short Tandem Repeat (STR) profiles were obtained using the CTT triplex. The results obtained are discussed in the context of the overall examination tactics in sexual assault cases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".