How we use automatic speaker comparison in forensic practice
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19535585 |
|---|---|
| Authors | David van der Vloed (0000-0003-4600-451X, Netherlands Forensic Institute), Tina Cambier-Langeveld (0000-0002-8126-9102, Netherlands Forensic Institute) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 29 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 201-224 |
| Publication date | 2023-04-14 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal of Speech Language and the Law (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1748-8885 • E-ISSN: 1748-8893 |
| Publisher | University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1558/ijsll.23955 |
| OpenAlex | W4365514676 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 1 |
Automatic methods are rapidly gaining ground in forensic speaker comparison, next to the existing auditory-acoustic methodology, performed by human experts with an academic background in phonetics. In this article we set out the steps that were taken before we could introduce the automatic method and start combining the two methods (software and human) in casework. We further provide a comprehensive explanation of the automatic method (originally written for readers of forensic reports) in the appendix. We discuss the legal reception of the combined approach, based on a court ruling in an appeal case in which the reliability of the speaker comparison was challenged by the defence. We also address the important issue of how conflicting results from the two methods may be dealt with in practice
Appeal · Linguistics · Natural language processing · Phonetics · Programming language · Speech recognition · Computer Science · Law · Music and Audio Processing · Speech and Audio Processing · Speech Recognition and Synthesis · Artificial Intelligence · Software
| Citations per year | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2025 - 2026 (2) |
| Highly cited | No |