Evolving the memory of a criminal’s face: methods to search a face space more effectively

Abstract

Abstract

Interviewing Techniques for Darwinian Facial‐Composite Systems

“…When the retention interval is longer, 1 or 2 days is the norm for witnesses in police investigations, such composites are typically named at only a few percent correct (Frowd et al, 2005a(Frowd et al, , 2007b(Frowd et al, , 2010Frowd & Fields, 2011;Frowd, McQuiston-Surrett, Anandaciva, Ireland, & Hancock, 2007d;Frowd, McQuistonSurrett, Kirkland, & Hancock, 2005c), with artists sketches fairing only slightly better at 8% (Frowd et al, 2005a). For evolving systems employed under short delays, composite naming appears to be about 20% correct for E-FIT-V (Valentine et al, 2010) and 35% for EvoFIT (Frowd, Skelton, Butt, Hassan, & Fields, in press-b); performance is encouraging with longer delays, at least it is for a fairly-recent version of EvoFIT, with composite naming in the region of 25% correct (Frowd et al, 2009b(Frowd et al, , 2010Hancock, Burke, & Frowd, 2011).…”