Cargando…

Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset

A likelihood ratio (LR) system is defined as the entire pipeline of the measurement and interpretation processes where probabilistic genotyping software (PGS) is a piece of the whole LR system. To gain understanding on how two LR systems perform, a total of 154 two-person, 147 three-person, and 127...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Riman, Sarah, Iyer, Hari, Vallone, Peter M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8448353/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34534241
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256714
_version_ 1784569222300434432
author Riman, Sarah
Iyer, Hari
Vallone, Peter M.
author_facet Riman, Sarah
Iyer, Hari
Vallone, Peter M.
author_sort Riman, Sarah
collection PubMed
description A likelihood ratio (LR) system is defined as the entire pipeline of the measurement and interpretation processes where probabilistic genotyping software (PGS) is a piece of the whole LR system. To gain understanding on how two LR systems perform, a total of 154 two-person, 147 three-person, and 127 four-person mixture profiles of varying DNA quality, DNA quantity, and mixture ratios were obtained from the filtered (.CSV) files of the GlobalFiler 29 cycles 15s PROVEDIt dataset and deconvolved in two independently developed fully continuous programs, STRmix v2.6 and EuroForMix v2.1.0. Various parameters were set in each software and LR computations obtained from the two software were based on same/fixed EPG features, same pair of propositions, number of contributors, theta, and population allele frequencies. The ability of each LR system to discriminate between contributor (H1-true) and non-contributor (H2-true) scenarios was evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively. Differences in the numeric LR values and their corresponding verbal classifications between the two LR systems were compared. The magnitude of the differences in the assigned LRs and the potential explanations for the observed differences greater than or equal to 3 on the log(10) scale were described. Cases of LR < 1 for H1-true tests and LR > 1 for H2-true tests were also discussed. Our intent is to demonstrate the value of using a publicly available ground truth known mixture dataset to assess discrimination performance of any LR system and show the steps used to understand similarities and differences between different LR systems. We share our observations with the forensic community and describe how examining more than one PGS with similar discrimination power can be beneficial, help analysts compare interpretation especially with low-template profiles or minor contributor cases, and be a potential additional diagnostic check even if software in use does contain certain diagnostic statistics as part of the output.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8448353
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84483532021-09-18 Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset Riman, Sarah Iyer, Hari Vallone, Peter M. PLoS One Research Article A likelihood ratio (LR) system is defined as the entire pipeline of the measurement and interpretation processes where probabilistic genotyping software (PGS) is a piece of the whole LR system. To gain understanding on how two LR systems perform, a total of 154 two-person, 147 three-person, and 127 four-person mixture profiles of varying DNA quality, DNA quantity, and mixture ratios were obtained from the filtered (.CSV) files of the GlobalFiler 29 cycles 15s PROVEDIt dataset and deconvolved in two independently developed fully continuous programs, STRmix v2.6 and EuroForMix v2.1.0. Various parameters were set in each software and LR computations obtained from the two software were based on same/fixed EPG features, same pair of propositions, number of contributors, theta, and population allele frequencies. The ability of each LR system to discriminate between contributor (H1-true) and non-contributor (H2-true) scenarios was evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively. Differences in the numeric LR values and their corresponding verbal classifications between the two LR systems were compared. The magnitude of the differences in the assigned LRs and the potential explanations for the observed differences greater than or equal to 3 on the log(10) scale were described. Cases of LR < 1 for H1-true tests and LR > 1 for H2-true tests were also discussed. Our intent is to demonstrate the value of using a publicly available ground truth known mixture dataset to assess discrimination performance of any LR system and show the steps used to understand similarities and differences between different LR systems. We share our observations with the forensic community and describe how examining more than one PGS with similar discrimination power can be beneficial, help analysts compare interpretation especially with low-template profiles or minor contributor cases, and be a potential additional diagnostic check even if software in use does contain certain diagnostic statistics as part of the output. Public Library of Science 2021-09-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8448353/ /pubmed/34534241 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256714 Text en https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) public domain dedication.
spellingShingle Research Article
Riman, Sarah
Iyer, Hari
Vallone, Peter M.
Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset
title Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset
title_full Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset
title_fullStr Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset
title_full_unstemmed Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset
title_short Examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the PROVEDIt dataset
title_sort examining performance and likelihood ratios for two likelihood ratio systems using the provedit dataset
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8448353/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34534241
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256714
work_keys_str_mv AT rimansarah examiningperformanceandlikelihoodratiosfortwolikelihoodratiosystemsusingtheproveditdataset
AT iyerhari examiningperformanceandlikelihoodratiosfortwolikelihoodratiosystemsusingtheproveditdataset
AT vallonepeterm examiningperformanceandlikelihoodratiosfortwolikelihoodratiosystemsusingtheproveditdataset