The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix: Utility and Evidence for its Validity

John S. Buckleton, Jo Anne Bright, Simone Gittelson, Tamyra R. Moretti, Anthony J. Onorato, Frederick R. Bieber, Bruce Budowle, Duncan A. Taylor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Forensic DNA interpretation is transitioning from manual interpretation based usually on binary decision-making toward computer-based systems that model the probability of the profile given different explanations for it, termed probabilistic genotyping (PG). Decision-making by laboratories to implement probability-based interpretation should be based on scientific principles for validity and information that supports its utility, such as criteria to support admissibility. The principles behind STRmix™ are outlined in this study and include standard mathematics and modeling of peak heights and variability in those heights. All PG methods generate a likelihood ratio (LR) and require the formulation of propositions. Principles underpinning formulations of propositions include the identification of reasonably assumed contributors. Substantial data have been produced that support precision, error rate, and reliability of PG, and in particular, STRmix™. A current issue is access to the code and quality processes used while coding. There are substantial data that describe the performance, strengths, and limitations of STRmix™, one of the available PG software.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)393-405
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Forensic Sciences
Volume64
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2019

Fingerprint

Decision Making
Software
Mathematics
Computer Systems
DNA

Keywords

  • DNA
  • STRmix™
  • forensic science
  • probabilistic genotyping
  • validation

Cite this

Buckleton, J. S., Bright, J. A., Gittelson, S., Moretti, T. R., Onorato, A. J., Bieber, F. R., ... Taylor, D. A. (2019). The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix: Utility and Evidence for its Validity. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 64(2), 393-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13898
Buckleton, John S. ; Bright, Jo Anne ; Gittelson, Simone ; Moretti, Tamyra R. ; Onorato, Anthony J. ; Bieber, Frederick R. ; Budowle, Bruce ; Taylor, Duncan A. / The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix : Utility and Evidence for its Validity. In: Journal of Forensic Sciences. 2019 ; Vol. 64, No. 2. pp. 393-405.
@article{b556f8697f49453daec8df72417efa79,
title = "The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix: Utility and Evidence for its Validity",
abstract = "Forensic DNA interpretation is transitioning from manual interpretation based usually on binary decision-making toward computer-based systems that model the probability of the profile given different explanations for it, termed probabilistic genotyping (PG). Decision-making by laboratories to implement probability-based interpretation should be based on scientific principles for validity and information that supports its utility, such as criteria to support admissibility. The principles behind STRmix™ are outlined in this study and include standard mathematics and modeling of peak heights and variability in those heights. All PG methods generate a likelihood ratio (LR) and require the formulation of propositions. Principles underpinning formulations of propositions include the identification of reasonably assumed contributors. Substantial data have been produced that support precision, error rate, and reliability of PG, and in particular, STRmix™. A current issue is access to the code and quality processes used while coding. There are substantial data that describe the performance, strengths, and limitations of STRmix™, one of the available PG software.",
keywords = "DNA, STRmix™, forensic science, probabilistic genotyping, validation",
author = "Buckleton, {John S.} and Bright, {Jo Anne} and Simone Gittelson and Moretti, {Tamyra R.} and Onorato, {Anthony J.} and Bieber, {Frederick R.} and Bruce Budowle and Taylor, {Duncan A.}",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1111/1556-4029.13898",
language = "English",
volume = "64",
pages = "393--405",
journal = "Journal of forensic sciences",
issn = "0022-1198",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

Buckleton, JS, Bright, JA, Gittelson, S, Moretti, TR, Onorato, AJ, Bieber, FR, Budowle, B & Taylor, DA 2019, 'The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix: Utility and Evidence for its Validity', Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 393-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13898

The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix : Utility and Evidence for its Validity. / Buckleton, John S.; Bright, Jo Anne; Gittelson, Simone; Moretti, Tamyra R.; Onorato, Anthony J.; Bieber, Frederick R.; Budowle, Bruce; Taylor, Duncan A.

In: Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 64, No. 2, 03.2019, p. 393-405.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix

T2 - Utility and Evidence for its Validity

AU - Buckleton, John S.

AU - Bright, Jo Anne

AU - Gittelson, Simone

AU - Moretti, Tamyra R.

AU - Onorato, Anthony J.

AU - Bieber, Frederick R.

AU - Budowle, Bruce

AU - Taylor, Duncan A.

PY - 2019/3

Y1 - 2019/3

N2 - Forensic DNA interpretation is transitioning from manual interpretation based usually on binary decision-making toward computer-based systems that model the probability of the profile given different explanations for it, termed probabilistic genotyping (PG). Decision-making by laboratories to implement probability-based interpretation should be based on scientific principles for validity and information that supports its utility, such as criteria to support admissibility. The principles behind STRmix™ are outlined in this study and include standard mathematics and modeling of peak heights and variability in those heights. All PG methods generate a likelihood ratio (LR) and require the formulation of propositions. Principles underpinning formulations of propositions include the identification of reasonably assumed contributors. Substantial data have been produced that support precision, error rate, and reliability of PG, and in particular, STRmix™. A current issue is access to the code and quality processes used while coding. There are substantial data that describe the performance, strengths, and limitations of STRmix™, one of the available PG software.

AB - Forensic DNA interpretation is transitioning from manual interpretation based usually on binary decision-making toward computer-based systems that model the probability of the profile given different explanations for it, termed probabilistic genotyping (PG). Decision-making by laboratories to implement probability-based interpretation should be based on scientific principles for validity and information that supports its utility, such as criteria to support admissibility. The principles behind STRmix™ are outlined in this study and include standard mathematics and modeling of peak heights and variability in those heights. All PG methods generate a likelihood ratio (LR) and require the formulation of propositions. Principles underpinning formulations of propositions include the identification of reasonably assumed contributors. Substantial data have been produced that support precision, error rate, and reliability of PG, and in particular, STRmix™. A current issue is access to the code and quality processes used while coding. There are substantial data that describe the performance, strengths, and limitations of STRmix™, one of the available PG software.

KW - DNA

KW - STRmix™

KW - forensic science

KW - probabilistic genotyping

KW - validation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053195129&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/1556-4029.13898

DO - 10.1111/1556-4029.13898

M3 - Article

C2 - 30132900

AN - SCOPUS:85053195129

VL - 64

SP - 393

EP - 405

JO - Journal of forensic sciences

JF - Journal of forensic sciences

SN - 0022-1198

IS - 2

ER -

Buckleton JS, Bright JA, Gittelson S, Moretti TR, Onorato AJ, Bieber FR et al. The Probabilistic Genotyping Software STRmix: Utility and Evidence for its Validity. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 2019 Mar;64(2):393-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13898