No abstract

Estimating error rates for firearm evidence identification is a fundamental challenge in forensic science. This paper describes the recently developed congruent matching cells (CMC) method for image comparisons, its application to firearm evidence identification, and its usage and initial tests for error rate estimation. The CMC method divides compared topography images into correlation cells. Four identification parameters are defined for quantifying both the topography similarity of the correlated cell pairs and the pattern congruency of the registered cell locations. A declared match requires a significant number of CMCs, i.e., cell pairs that meet all similarity and congruency requirements. Initial testing on breech face impressions of a set of 40 cartridge cases fired with consecutively manufactured pistol slides showed wide separation between the distributions of CMC numbers observed for known matching and known non-matching image pairs. Another test on 95 cartridge cases from a different set of slides manufactured by the same process also yielded widely separated distributions. The test results were used to develop two statistical models for the probability mass function of CMC correlation scores. The models were applied to develop a framework for estimating cumulative false positive and false negative error rates and individual error rates of declared matches and non-matches for this population of breech face impressions. The prospect for applying the models to large populations and realistic case work is also discussed. The CMC method can provide a statistical foundation for estimating error rates in firearm evidence identifications, thus emulating methods used for forensic identification of DNA evidence.

Areal Cross Correlation Function, a statistical function of three dimensional surface topography ANOVA Analysis of Variance ATF Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives BF Breech face CCF Cross Correlation Function, a statistical function of two dimensional surface topography DAS Data Acquisition Station, a component of IBIS (below) EEEL Electronics and Electrical Engineering Laboratory, an organizational unit of NIST FP Firing pin

The ability to measure step height and to calibrate step height artefacts is of vital interest in nanometrology. On that score the WGDM7 decided in 1998 to include measurements of step heights in a series of comparisons on the field of nanometrology.The comparison about step height (NANO2) started in September 2000 with the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) as pilot laboratory. Fourteen national metrology institutes worldwide participated in this comparison. A set of five step height standards in the range from 7 nm to 800 nm was used for the comparison. The lateral size of the structures of the step height standards was chosen so that the height could be measured by different types of instruments, for example, interference microscopes, stylus instruments and scanning probe microscopes (SPM). The reference values were calculated as the weighted mean of all measurements that fulfilled the En < 1 criteria.Most of the results were in good agreement with the reference values. It is noticeable that the results obtained by different types of instruments are quite compatible. Also this comparison is the first comprehensive test of the reliability of SPM and their suitability for traceable measurements of step heights. Further it was shown that today step heights on samples can be measured with uncertainties in the sub-nanometre range. Differences in the calculation of the uncertainty depend on the types of instruments and on the users. For each class of instrument, e.g. SPM, it would be meaningful to homogenise these models. Hence the results of this comparison are of great importance in many respects.Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCL, according to the provisions of the Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).