217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25625964)
1. NOCIt: a computational method to infer the number of contributors to DNA samples analyzed by STR genotyping.
Swaminathan H; Grgicak CM; Medard M; Lun DS
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 May; 16():172-180. PubMed ID: 25625964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Inferring the Number of Contributors to Complex DNA Mixtures Using Three Methods: Exploring the Limits of Low-Template DNA Interpretation.
Alfonse LE; Tejada G; Swaminathan H; Lun DS; Grgicak CM
J Forensic Sci; 2017 Mar; 62(2):308-316. PubMed ID: 27907229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A series of developmental validation tests for Number of Contributors platforms: Exemplars using NOCIt and a neural network.
Valtl J; Mönich UJ; Lun DS; Kelley J; Grgicak CM
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2021 Sep; 54():102556. PubMed ID: 34225042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Statistical modeling of STR capillary electrophoresis signal.
Karkar S; Alfonse LE; Grgicak CM; Lun DS
BMC Bioinformatics; 2019 Dec; 20(Suppl 16):584. PubMed ID: 31787097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A large-scale validation of NOCIt's a posteriori probability of the number of contributors and its integration into forensic interpretation pipelines.
Grgicak CM; Karkar S; Yearwood-Garcia X; Alfonse LE; Duffy KR; Lun DS
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Jul; 47():102296. PubMed ID: 32339916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Determining the number of contributors to DNA mixtures in the low-template regime: Exploring the impacts of sampling and detection effects.
Norsworthy S; Lun DS; Grgicak CM
Leg Med (Tokyo); 2018 May; 32():1-8. PubMed ID: 29453054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The a posteriori probability of the number of contributors when conditioned on an assumed contributor.
Grgicak CM; Duffy KR; Lun DS
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2021 Sep; 54():102563. PubMed ID: 34284325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Identifying the most likely contributors to a Y-STR mixture using the discrete Laplace method.
Andersen MM; Eriksen PS; Mogensen HS; Morling N
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 Mar; 15():76-83. PubMed ID: 25303788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. CEESIt: A computational tool for the interpretation of STR mixtures.
Swaminathan H; Garg A; Grgicak CM; Medard M; Lun DS
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 May; 22():149-160. PubMed ID: 26946255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. NGS-based likelihood ratio for identifying contributors in two- and three-person DNA mixtures.
Chan Mun Wei J; Zhao Z; Li SC; Ng YK
Comput Biol Chem; 2018 Jun; 74():428-433. PubMed ID: 29625871
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. TrueAllele(®) Genotype Identification on DNA Mixtures Containing up to Five Unknown Contributors.
Perlin MW; Hornyak JM; Sugimoto G; Miller KW
J Forensic Sci; 2015 Jul; 60(4):857-68. PubMed ID: 26189920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Automated estimation of the number of contributors in autosomal short tandem repeat profiles using a machine learning approach.
Benschop CCG; van der Linden J; Hoogenboom J; Ypma R; Haned H
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Nov; 43():102150. PubMed ID: 31476660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Internal validation of STRmix™ for the interpretation of single source and mixed DNA profiles.
Moretti TR; Just RS; Kehl SC; Willis LE; Buckleton JS; Bright JA; Taylor DA; Onorato AJ
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2017 Jul; 29():126-144. PubMed ID: 28504203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A large-scale dataset of single and mixed-source short tandem repeat profiles to inform human identification strategies: PROVEDIt.
Alfonse LE; Garrett AD; Lun DS; Duffy KR; Grgicak CM
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Jan; 32():62-70. PubMed ID: 29091906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Least-square deconvolution: a framework for interpreting short tandem repeat mixtures.
Wang T; Xue N; Birdwell JD
J Forensic Sci; 2006 Nov; 51(6):1284-97. PubMed ID: 17199614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Estimation of the number of contributors of theoretical mixture profiles based on allele counting: Does increasing the number of loci increase success rate of estimates?
Dembinski GM; Sobieralski C; Picard CJ
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2018 Mar; 33():24-32. PubMed ID: 29175725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Development and validation of open-source software for DNA mixture interpretation based on a quantitative continuous model.
Manabe S; Morimoto C; Hamano Y; Fujimoto S; Tamaki K
PLoS One; 2017; 12(11):e0188183. PubMed ID: 29149210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Massively parallel sequencing of 17 commonly used forensic autosomal STRs and amelogenin with small amplicons.
Kim EH; Lee HY; Yang IS; Jung SE; Yang WI; Shin KJ
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 May; 22():1-7. PubMed ID: 26799314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Identifying contributors of DNA mixtures by means of quantitative information of STR typing.
Tvedebrink T; Eriksen PS; Mogensen HS; Morling N
J Comput Biol; 2012 Jul; 19(7):887-902. PubMed ID: 21210742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. An assessment of the information content of likelihood ratios derived from complex mixtures.
Marsden CD; Rudin N; Inman K; Lohmueller KE
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2016 May; 22():64-72. PubMed ID: 26851613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
