The application of the likelihood ratio to the resolution of redundant diversity in forensic authoring
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2024.411Abstract
The article deals with the problem of resolving the redundant diversity of algorithms used to solve the problems of forensic authoring. The availability of texts in electronic form and the banalization of the use of software tools have led to an uncontrollable variety of algorithms used to solve such problems. The modern stage in the development of the theory and practice of author identification is characterized by the widespread and easy availability of software tools that allow to process texts existing in electronic form without additional training. If at the initial stage of development of this subject domain the objects of research were mainly literary texts, today the center of interest are electronic texts (e-mails, SMS, chat rooms). This creates for their users an illusion of lack of necessity at least a general familiarity with the basic principles of stylometry (at least, such as the requirement of genre-stylistic homogeneity of the texts studied, exclusion of personages’ speech and processing only the author’s speech, the priority of syntax over vocabulary), which already has a rather respectable history. The lack of tools for validating the results of forensic analysis in this area makes it difficult to use them in legal practice. In the Anglo-Saxon jurisdictions, it is mandatory to use the method of likelihood ratio (LR) assessment when testing statistical hypotheses. LR shows the probability of similarity between a text of known origin and an attributed text for the null hypothesis that both texts have the same origin, versus the alternative hypothesis claiming that they have different origins. The application of this method reduces the redundant diversity of identification algorithms by eliminating the use of algorithms that do not include statistical hypothesis checking and LR estimation.
Keywords:
forensic authorship, likelihood ratio, statistical hypothesis testing, author identification, individual author style, attribution, null hypothesis, alternative hypothesis
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Библиография
Луценко, Е. В. 2004. «Атрибуция анонимных и псевдонимных текстов в системно-когнитивном анализе». Политематический сетевой электронный научный журнал Кубанского государственного аграрного университета 5: 36–56. Дата обращения 11 ноября, 2024. http://ej.kubagro.ru/2004/03/03.
Марусенко, М. А. 1990. Атрибуция анонимных и псевдонимных литературных произведений методами теории распознавания образов. Л.: Изд-во Ленингр. гос. ун-та.
Марусенко, М. А., В. В. Петров, К. Р. Пиотровская, И. Н. Маньяс, Н. К. Мамаев. 2019. «Об авторстве “писем Берии из заточения”». Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Право 3: 568–605.
Петров, В. В., М. А. Марусенко. 2017. «Об истинном авторе “Записки Юровского”». Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Право 8 (1): 76–107.
Рейхесберг, Н. М. 1894. Адольф Кетле. Его жизнь, и научная деятельность. СПб.: Тип. Ю. Н. Эрлих.
Седова, Т. А., С. П. Кушниренко, В. Д. Пристансков, ред. 2021. Криминалистика. М.: Юстиция.
Aitken, C. G. G., F. Taroni. 2004. Statistics and the evaluation of evidence for forensic scientists. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Aitken, C. G., D. A. Stoney. 1991. The use of statistics in forensic science. New York; London: Ellis Horwood.
Aitken, C., C. E. Y. Berger, J. S. Buckleton, C. Champod, J. Curran, A. P. Dawid, I. W. Evett, P. Gill, J. Gonzalez-Rodriguez, G. Jackson, A. Kloosterman, T. Lovelock, D. Lucy, P. Margot, L. McKenn, D. Meuwly, C. Neumann, N. N. Daeid, A. Nordgaard, R. Puch-Solis, B. Rasmusson, M. Redmayne, P. Roberts, B. Robertson, C. P. Roux, M. Sjerps, F. Taroni, T. Tjin-A-Tsoi, G. Vignaux, S. Willis, G. Zadora. 2011. “Expressing evaluative opinions: A position statement”. Scientific Justice 51: 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110228069.
Alred, G. J., C. T. Brusaw, W. E. Oliu. 2008. Handbook of technical writing. 9th ed. Bedford: St. Martin’s Press.
Amelin, K., O. Granichin, N. Kizhaeva, Z. Volkovich. 2018. “Patterning of writing style evolution by means of dynamic similarity”. Pattern Recognition 77: 45–64.
Baldwin, J. 1979. “Phonetics and speaker identification”. Medicine, Science and the Law 9: 231–232.
Basson, J.-C., D. Labbe. 2020. “Les precieux manuscrits”. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Statistical Analysis of Textual Data (16–19 june 2020). Toulouse. Дата обращения 11 ноября, 2024. http://lexicometrica.univ-paris3.fr/jadt/JADT2020/jadt2020_pdf/BASSON_LABBE_JADT2020.pdf.
Burrows, J. F. 2002. “Delta: A measure of stylistic difference and a guide to likely authorship”. Literary and Linguistic Computing 17 (3): 267–287.
Chaski, C. E. 2005. “Who is at the keyboard. Authorship attribution in digital evidence investigations”. International Journal of Digital Evidence 4 (1): 1–14.
Glaudes, P., A. Cervoni, F. Guglielmi, C. Mayaux, M. Marusenko, Ye. Kuralesina, M. Miretina, Y. Nikitina, M. Solovyeva, O. Khutoretskaya. 2022. “Jules Barbey d’Aurevilly et corpus journalistique. Problemes d’attribution”. Observer la vie litteraire. Etudes litteraires et numeriques 2: 261–304.
Holmes, D. I. 1998. “The evolution of stylometry in humanities scholarship”. Literary and Linguistic Computing 13 (3): 111–117.
Johnson, A., D. Wright. 2014. “Identifying idiolect in forensic authorship attribution”. Language and Law = Linguagem e Direito 1 (1): 37–69.
Malyutov, M. B., C. I. Wickramasinghe, S. Li. 2007. “Conditional complexity of compression for authorship attribution”. SFB 649 Discussion Paper. Дата обращения 11 ноября, 2024. https://scholar.google.co.id/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=auS8PHEAAAAJ&cstart=20&pagesize=80&citation_for_view=auS8PHEAAAAJ:LkGwnXOMwfcC.
Morrison, G. S. 2011. “Measuring the validity and reliability of forensic likelihood-ratio systems”. Scientific Justice 51: 91–98.
Oliveira J., W. E. Justino, L. S. Oliveira. 2013. “Comparing compression models for authorship attribution”. Forensic Science International 228: 100–104.
Pavelec, D., E. Justino, L. S. Oliveira. 2007. “Author identification using stylometric features”. Inteligencia Artificial. Revista Iberoamericana de Inteligencia Artificial 11 (36): 59–65.
Robertson, B., T. Vignaux, C. Berger. 1995. Interpreting evidence: Evaluating forensic science in the courtroom. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Saks, M. J. 2010. “Forensic identification: From a faith-based ‘Science’ to a scientific science”. Forensic Science International 201: 14–17.
Savoy, J. 2012. “Authorship attribution: A comparative study of three text corpora and three languages”. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 19 (2): 132–161.
Varney, M. H. 1977. “Forensic linguistics”. English Today 13 (4): 42–47.
Zheng, R., J. Li, H. Chen, Z. Huang. 2006. “A framework for authorship identification of online messages: Writing-style features and classification techniques”. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 57 (3): 378–393.
References
Aitken, C. G. G., D. A. Stoney. 1991. The Use of Statistics in Forensic Science. New York; London, Ellis Horwood.
Aitken, C. G. G., F. Taroni. 2004. Statistics and the evaluation of evidence for forensic scientists. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons.
Aitken, C., C. E. Y. Berger, J. S. Buckleton, C. Champod, J. Curran, A. P. Dawid, I. W. Evett, P. Gill, J. Gonzalez-Rodriguez, G. Jackson, A. Kloosterman, T. Lovelock, D. Lucy, P. Margot, L. McKenn, D. Meuwly, C. Neumann, N. N. Daeid, A. Nordgaard, R. Puch-Solis, B. Rasmusson, M. Redmayne, P. Roberts, B. Robertson, C. P. Roux, M. Sjerps, F. Taroni, T. Tjin-A-Tsoi, G. Vignaux, S. Willis, G. Zadora. 2011. Expressing evaluative opinions: a position statement. Scientific Justice 51: 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110228069.1
Alred, G. J., C. T. Brusaw, W. Oliu. E. 2008. Handbook of technical writing. 9th ed. Bedford, St. Martin’s Press.
Amelin, K., O. Granichin, N. Kizhaeva, Z. Volkovich. 2018. “Patterning of writing style evolution by means of dynamic similarity”. Pattern Recognition 77: 45–64.
Baldwin, J. 1979. “Phonetics and speaker identification”. Medicine, Science and the Law 9: 231–232.
Basson, J.-C., D. Labbe. 2020. “Les precieux manuscrits”. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Statistical Analysis of Textual Data (16–19 june 2020). Toulouse. Accessed November 11, 2024. http://lexicometrica.univ-paris3.fr/jadt/JADT2020/jadt2020_pdf/BASSON_LABBE_JADT2020.pdf.
Burrows, J. F. 2002. “Delta: A measure of stylistic difference and a guide to likely authorship”. Literary and Linguistic Computing 17 (3): 267–287.
Chaski, C. E. 2005. “Who is at the keyboard. Authorship attribution in digital evidence investigations”. International Journal of Digital Evidence 4 (1): 1–14.
Glaudes, P., A. Cervoni, F. Guglielmi, C. Mayaux, M. Marusenko, Y. Kuralesina, M. Miretina, Y. Nikitina, M. Solovyeva, O. Khutoretskaya. 2022. “Jules Barbey d’Aurevilly et corpus journalistique. Problemes d’attribution”. Observer la vie litteraire. Etudes litteraires et numeriques 2: 261–304.
Holmes, D. I. 1998. “The evolution of stylometry in humanities scholarship”. Literary and Linguistic Computing 13 (3): 111–117.
Johnson, A., D. Wright. 2014. “Identifying idiolect in forensic authorship attribution”. Language and Law = Linguagem e Direito 1 (1): 37–69.
Lutsenko, E. V. “Attribution of anonymous and pseudonymous texts in system-cognitive analysis”. Politematicheskii setevoi elektronnyi nauchnyi zhurnal Kubanskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta 5: 36–56. Accessed November 11, 2024. http://ej.kubagro.ru/2004/03/03.
Malyutov, M. B., C. I. Wickramasinghe, S. Li. 2007. “Conditional complexity of compression for authorship attribution”. SFB 649 Discussion Paper. Accessed November 11, 2024. https://scholar.google.co.id/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=auS8PHEAAAAJ&cstart=20&pagesize=80&citation_for_view=auS8PHEAAAAJ:LkGwnXOMwfcC.
Marusenko, M. A. 1990. Attribution of anonymous and pseudonymous literary works by methods of pattern recognition theory. Leningrad, Leningradskii gosudarstvennyi universitet Publ. (In Russian)
Marusenko, M. A., V. V. Petrov, K. R. Piotrovskaya, I. N. Manyas, N. K. Mamaev. 2019. “On the authorship of ‘Beria’s letters from imprisonment’”. Vestnik Sankt Petersburgskogo Universiteta. Pravo 3: 568–605. (In Russian)
Morrison, G. S. 2011. “Measuring the validity and reliability of forensic likelihood-ratio systems”. Scientific Justice 51: 91–98.
Oliveira J., W. E. Justino, L. S. Oliveira. 2013. “Comparing compression models for authorship attribution”. Forensic Science International 228: 100–104.
Pavelec, D., E. Justino, L. S. Oliveira. 2007. “Author identification using stylometric features”. Inteligencia Artificial. Revista Iberoamericana de Inteligencia Artificial 11 (36): 59–65.
Petrov, V. V., M. A. Marusenko. 2017. “On the true author of Yurovsky’s Notes”. Vestnik Sankt Petersburgskogo Universiteta. Pravo 8 (1): 76–107. (In Russian)
Reichesberg, N. M. 1894. Adolph Quetelet. His life and scientific work. St. Petersburg, Tipografiia Yu. N. Ehrlich Publ. (In Russian)
Robertson, B., T. Vignaux, C. Berger. 1995. Interpreting evidence: Evaluating forensic science in the courtroom. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons.
Saks, M. J. 2010. “Forensic identification: From a faith-based ‘Science’ to a scientific science”. Forensic Science International 201: 14–17.
Savoy, J. 2012. “Authorship attribution: A comparative study of three text corpora and three languages”. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 19 (2): 132–161.
Sedova, T. A., S. P. Kushnirenko, V. D. Pristanskov, eds. 2021. Forensic science. Moscow, Iustitsiia Publ. (In Russian)
Varney, M. H. 1977. “Forensic linguistics”. English Today 13 (4): 42–47.
Zheng, R., J. Li, H. Chen, Z. Huang. 2006. “A framework for authorship identification of online messages: Writing-style features and classification techniques”. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 57 (3): 378–393.
Downloads
Published
2024-12-28
How to Cite
Marusenko , M. A., & Petrov , V. V. (2024). The application of the likelihood ratio to the resolution of redundant diversity in forensic authoring. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law, 15(4), 1086–1097. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2024.411
Issue
Section
Criminalistics
License
Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
