Linguistic Bayesian Networks for reasoning with subjective probabilities in forensic statistics

ABSTRACT

Recent work in forensic statistics has shown how Bayesian Networks (BNs) can be used to infer the probability of defence and prosecution statements based on forensic evidence. This is an important development as it helps to quantify the meaning of forensic expert testimony during court proceedings, for example, that there is "strong support" for the defence or prosecution position. Due to the lack of experimental data, inferred probabilities often rely on subjective probabilities provided by experts. Because these are based on informed guesses, it is very difficult to express them accurately with precise numbers. Yet, conventional BNs can only employ probabilities expressed as real numbers. To address this issue, this paper presents a novel extension of probability theory. This allow the expression of subjective probabilities as fuzzy numbers, which more faithfully reflect expert opinion. By means of practical a example, it will be shown that the accurate representation of this lack of precision in reasoning with subjective probabilities has important implications for the overall result.

REFERENCES

• 1: Aitken, C., Taroni, F., and Garbolino, P. A. graphical model for the evaluation of cross-transfer evidence in DNA profiles. Theoretical Population Biology, 63(3), 2003. To appear.
• 2: Balding, D. J. and Donnelly, P. Inference in forensic identification. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, 158:21--53, 1995.
• 3: D. V. Budescu and T. S. Wallsten. Consistency in interpretation of probabilistic phrases. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 36:391--405, 1985.
• 4: Cook, R., Evett, I., Jackson, G., Jones, P., and Lambert, J. A hierarchy of propositions: deciding which level to address in casework. Science and Justice, 38:231--239, 1998.
• 5: Cook, R., Evett, I., Jackson, G., Jones, P., and Lambert, J. A model for case assessment and interpretation. Science and Justice, 38:151--156, 1998.
• 6: Cook, R., Evett, I., Jackson, G., Jones, P., and Lambert, J. Case pre-assessment and review in a two-way transfer case. Science and Justice, 39:103--111, 1999.
• 7: Evett, I., Jackson, G., and Lambert, J. More on the hierarchy of propositions: exploring the distinction between explanations and propositions. Science and Justice, 40:3--10, 2000.
• 8: Evett, I., Jackson, G., Lambert, J., and McCrossan, S. The impact of the principles of evidence interpretation on the structure and content of statements. Science and Justice, 40:233--239, 2000.
• 9: J. Gómez Marin-Blazquez and Q. Shen. From approximative to descriptive fuzzy classifiers. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 10(4):487--497, 2002.
• 10: G. Grimmet and D. Welsh. Probability: an introduction. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986.
• 11: J. Halliwell and Q. Shen. Towards linguistic probability theory. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, pages 596--601, 2002.
• 12: Pramod Jain , Alice M. Agogino, Stochastic sensitivity analysis using fuzzy influence diagrams, Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, p.79-92, January 1990
• 13: D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, and A. Tversy. Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1985.
• 14: National Research Council Governing Board Committee on the Assessment of Risk. The handling of risk assessments in NRC reports. Washington D.C, 1981.
• 15: Judea Pearl, Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: networks of plausible inference, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1988
• 16: T. S. Wallsten, D. V. Budescu, A. Rapoport, R. Zwick, and B. Forsyth. Measuring the vague meanings of probability terms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115(4):348--365, 1986.
• 17: L. Zadeh. Fuzzy probabilities. Information Processing Management, 20:363--372, 1984.
• 18: A. C. Zimmer. Verbal vs. numerical processing of subjective probabilities. In R. W. Scholz, editor, Decision making under uncertainty. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983.
• 19: A. C. Zimmer. What uncertainty judgements can tell about the underlying subjective probabilities. In L. N. Kanal and J. F. Lemmer, editors, Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986.

INDEX TERMS

Keywords:
bayesian networks, decision support systems, forensic statistics, fuzzy numbers, linguistic probabilities