Two‐stage approach for the inference of the source of high‐dimensional and complex chemical data in forensic science
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Forensic chemists are often criticised for the lack of quantitative support for the conclusions of their examinations. While scholars advocate for the use of a Bayes factor to quantify the weight of forensic evidence, it is often impossible to assign the necessary probability measures to perform likelihood‐based inference on chemical data. To address this issue, we leverage the properties of kernel functions to offer a method that allows for statistically supporting the inference of the identity of source of sets of trace and control objects by way of a single test. Our method is generic in that it can be easily tailored to any type of data encountered in forensic chemistry, and our method does not depend on the dimension or the type of the considered data. The application of our method to paint evidence analysed by FTIR shows that this type of evidence carries substantial probative value. Finally, our approach can easily be extended to other types of chemical evidence such as glass, fibres, and dust.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it