Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Sunday, September 14, 2008
September 2008
Currently working on several nice projects and cases. In August I was at the workshop Computational Forensics in Washington DC and enjoyed the talks that were given. Next year it will be held at the Netherlands Forensic Institute in The Hague.
The projects are now starting again, and one of the projects is ENF where two students are working on, and for FIDIS we are working on a deliverable on PRNU (Pixel Response Non Uniformity) and matching cameras on YouTube, as well as forensic face comparison. This event will be held in Dresden this month.
I am also a very enthousiastic user of the small notebooks of 900 grams which can also be used for presentations and just internet use under way. It is convenient also for presentations and in the train.
Finally I recovered completely from my lung infection I had earlier this year, and currently I feel healthy again. However for that reason I decided earlier this year not to go to Australia in Melbourne in October since the doctor did not recommend to fly 24 hours. The agenda looks excellent of that meeting, and otherwise I certainly would have participated.
The projects are now starting again, and one of the projects is ENF where two students are working on, and for FIDIS we are working on a deliverable on PRNU (Pixel Response Non Uniformity) and matching cameras on YouTube, as well as forensic face comparison. This event will be held in Dresden this month.
I am also a very enthousiastic user of the small notebooks of 900 grams which can also be used for presentations and just internet use under way. It is convenient also for presentations and in the train.
Finally I recovered completely from my lung infection I had earlier this year, and currently I feel healthy again. However for that reason I decided earlier this year not to go to Australia in Melbourne in October since the doctor did not recommend to fly 24 hours. The agenda looks excellent of that meeting, and otherwise I certainly would have participated.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
July (4)
This month is really interesting in forensic way. Last Thursday I had to testify in court on a face comparison case. First I had to wait for four hours outside of the court room, before I was called to testify (these are small disadvantages of being a forensic scientist, an expert often has to wait for long times in court, however Dutch courts tend not to call expert witnesses as often as in the United States).
It appeared that they were ready for asking the questions, since all three judges, the two lawyers and the prosecutor were asking questions. It was slightly more difficult compared to other cases, since I was not allowed to have my notes and the reports that we had written in front of me (they took them away). I just had to answer the questions, without looking to any written material.
Then the questioning started. The usual questions were asked concerning expertise, however now there were more questions. We had written our report in a Bayesian conclusion, so I had to explain how this worked, and how it developed. Also some nice questions were concerning the software we used (image visualisation software) and if it was validated, and how it was validated. Furthermore questions concerning proficiency tests between different laboratories and how the field works.
Of course it would be nice if face comparison would be more objective, then with the method that we use now with three different examiners filling in sheets concerning the comparison of the different parts of the face. However the issue is that there is not enough solid research to make it more objective.
This is in many fields in forensic science the case, that the experience of the expert counts for the conclusion. More research should indeed be done in these fields, to make them more objective, and it was for me somewhat disappointing that the European Commission did not put this in the seventh Framework Research projects yet, however I understand they have to make a selection. In the past several efforts have been made in European projects, such as ear comparison fearid etc, however it appears that we need more solid research on the different fields in forensic science to make the conclusions more objective and make the different conclusions of different experts become more calibrated.
It appeared that they were ready for asking the questions, since all three judges, the two lawyers and the prosecutor were asking questions. It was slightly more difficult compared to other cases, since I was not allowed to have my notes and the reports that we had written in front of me (they took them away). I just had to answer the questions, without looking to any written material.
Then the questioning started. The usual questions were asked concerning expertise, however now there were more questions. We had written our report in a Bayesian conclusion, so I had to explain how this worked, and how it developed. Also some nice questions were concerning the software we used (image visualisation software) and if it was validated, and how it was validated. Furthermore questions concerning proficiency tests between different laboratories and how the field works.
Of course it would be nice if face comparison would be more objective, then with the method that we use now with three different examiners filling in sheets concerning the comparison of the different parts of the face. However the issue is that there is not enough solid research to make it more objective.
This is in many fields in forensic science the case, that the experience of the expert counts for the conclusion. More research should indeed be done in these fields, to make them more objective, and it was for me somewhat disappointing that the European Commission did not put this in the seventh Framework Research projects yet, however I understand they have to make a selection. In the past several efforts have been made in European projects, such as ear comparison fearid etc, however it appears that we need more solid research on the different fields in forensic science to make the conclusions more objective and make the different conclusions of different experts become more calibrated.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
July (3)
Some software is more complicated to develop then other software, and sometimes it takes much more time then expected, however the results count. With one of the projects were I am project leader of, defraser, it appears that we have now a stable product which can be used to analyse MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 and 3GP. Broken video streams can be analyses as well as many others, and since it is open source others can also develop on it. Students from the Hogeschool Amsterdam have developed plugins for AVI and JPEG, and we expect them also to be available soon. You can download it for free from https://sourceforge.net/projects/defraser/ and of course we are more than happy if you can also develop plugins. The software works for broken or parts of 3GP-files for example from mobile phones.
Monday, July 07, 2008
July 2008 (2)
Just for two days in Brussels at a review meeting for the FIDIS www.fidis.net project at the European Commission. It is nice to see which deliverables have been made in this project. Also got some time to do so planning, en even to update sourceforge with our newest PRNU tool for identifying cameras in Java. It can be found at https://sourceforge.net/projects/prnucompare/ and is made by a student Maarten van der Mark from the Haagse Hogeschool and I was supervisor for this project. It is nice to see how we can develop nice tools in Java, however validation remains important.
One should take many flatfield images (white/grey area) to determine the PRNU. With this possible a small database can be made, and several cameras can be entered. We also would like to add this software to a deliverable of FIDIS, where we try to link cameras on Youtube or other sources.
One should take many flatfield images (white/grey area) to determine the PRNU. With this possible a small database can be made, and several cameras can be entered. We also would like to add this software to a deliverable of FIDIS, where we try to link cameras on Youtube or other sources.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Dunes of Zandvoort
When cycling from my work to my home (with train connection), I go through the dunes, which is convenient and nice to see.
July 2008
It is a month of reviews, writing, planning and doing some casework. Also the vacations are starting these months, so everything is more quiet. However it is a good time to do the work. We will put a Java applet on sourceforge for computing PRNU of cameras. It has been developed by a student at our lab and works very nice for making databases of Pixel Non Response Uniformity of cameras. I will post the link here as soon as it is available, which is expected in a few weeks.
We might consider linking cameras on Youtube with this method (with the University of Dresden) which is one of the research topics of the new deliverable of FIDIS . I am also happy that our deliverable on forensic profiling is ready for review by the European Commission now.
In the meantime I decided (due to my earlier health issues) not to make long trips to Australia, so unfortunately I can not attend the meeting in Melbourne. Also some preparation of the ENFSI meeting of the Forensic IT Working group in Madrid 1-3 October. And also invited as speaker at 2nd International Workshop on Computational Forensics in Washington DC.
We might consider linking cameras on Youtube with this method (with the University of Dresden) which is one of the research topics of the new deliverable of FIDIS . I am also happy that our deliverable on forensic profiling is ready for review by the European Commission now.
In the meantime I decided (due to my earlier health issues) not to make long trips to Australia, so unfortunately I can not attend the meeting in Melbourne. Also some preparation of the ENFSI meeting of the Forensic IT Working group in Madrid 1-3 October. And also invited as speaker at 2nd International Workshop on Computational Forensics in Washington DC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)