Fingermarks and Other Impressions Left by the Human Body - A Review (August 2007-July 2010)

The purpose of this paper is to review the scientific literature from August 2007 to July 2010. The review is focused on more than 420 published papers. The review will not cover information coming from international meetings available only in abstract form. Fingermarks constitute an important chapter with coverage of the identification process as well as detection techniques on various surfaces. We note that the research has been very dense both at exploring and understanding current detection methods as well as bringing groundbreaking techniques to increase the number of marks detected from various objects. The recent report from the US National Research Council (NRC) is a milestone that has promoted a critical discussion on the state of forensic science and its associated research. We can expect a surge of interest in research in relation to cognitive aspect of mark and print comparison, establishment of relevant forensic error rates and statistical modelling of the selectivity of marks' attributes. Other biometric means of forensic identification such as footmarks or earmarks are also covered in the report. Compared to previous years, we noted a decrease in the number of submission in these areas. No doubt that the NRC report has set the seed for further investigation of these fields as well.

The development of an automatic recognition system for earmark and earprint comparisons

The value of earmarks as an efficient means of personal identification is still subject to debate. It has been argued that the field is lacking a firm systematic and structured data basis to help practitioners to form their conclusions. Typically, there is a paucity of research guiding as to the selectivity of the features used in the comparison process between an earmark and reference earprints taken from an individual. This study proposes a system for the automatic comparison of earprints and earmarks, operating without any manual extraction of key-points or manual annotations. For each donor, a model is created using multiple reference prints, hence capturing the donor within source variability. For each comparison between a mark and a model, images are automatically aligned and a proximity score, based on a normalized 2D correlation coefficient, is calculated. Appropriate use of this score allows deriving a likelihood ratio that can be explored under known state of affairs (both in cases where it is known that the mark has been left by the donor that gave the model and conversely in cases when it is established that the mark originates from a different source). To assess the system performance, a first dataset containing 1229 donors elaborated during the FearID research project was used. Based on these data, for mark-to-print comparisons, the system performed with an equal error rate (EER) of 2.3% and about 88% of marks are found in the first 3 positions of a hitlist. When performing print-to-print transactions, results show an equal error rate of 0.5%. The system was then tested using real-case data obtained from police forces.