These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29291950)

  • 1. The impact in forensic voice comparison of lack of calibration and of mismatched conditions between the known-speaker recording and the relevant-population sample recordings.
    Morrison GS
    Forensic Sci Int; 2018 Feb; 283():e1-e7. PubMed ID: 29291950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Speaker identification in courtroom contexts - Part I: Individual listeners compared to forensic voice comparison based on automatic-speaker-recognition technology.
    Basu N; Bali AS; Weber P; Rosas-Aguilar C; Edmond G; Martire KA; Morrison GS
    Forensic Sci Int; 2022 Dec; 341():111499. PubMed ID: 36283276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Speaker identification in courtroom contexts - Part II: Investigation of bias in individual listeners' responses.
    Basu N; Weber P; Bali AS; Rosas-Aguilar C; Edmond G; Martire KA; Morrison GS
    Forensic Sci Int; 2023 Aug; 349():111768. PubMed ID: 37392611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speaker identification in courtroom contexts - Part III: Groups of collaborating listeners compared to forensic voice comparison based on automatic-speaker-recognition technology.
    Bali AS; Basu N; Weber P; Rosas-Aguilar C; Edmond G; Martire KA; Morrison GS
    Forensic Sci Int; 2024 Jul; 360():112048. PubMed ID: 38733653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. On compensation of mismatched recording conditions in the Bayesian approach for forensic automatic speaker recognition.
    Botti F; Alexander A; Drygajlo A
    Forensic Sci Int; 2004 Dec; 146 Suppl():S101-6. PubMed ID: 15639552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Use of relevant data, quantitative measurements, and statistical models to calculate a likelihood ratio for a Chinese forensic voice comparison case involving two sisters.
    Zhang C; Morrison GS; Enzinger E
    Forensic Sci Int; 2016 Oct; 267():115-124. PubMed ID: 27592142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Empirical test of the performance of an acoustic-phonetic approach to forensic voice comparison under conditions similar to those of a real case.
    Enzinger E; Morrison GS
    Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Aug; 277():30-40. PubMed ID: 28575731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A demonstration of the application of the new paradigm for the evaluation of forensic evidence under conditions reflecting those of a real forensic-voice-comparison case.
    Enzinger E; Morrison GS; Ochoa F
    Sci Justice; 2016 Jan; 56(1):42-57. PubMed ID: 26746825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Validations of an alpha version of the E
    Weber P; Enzinger E; Labrador B; Lozano-Díez A; Ramos D; González-Rodríguez J; Morrison GS
    Forensic Sci Int Synerg; 2022; 4():100223. PubMed ID: 35281657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of language mismatch in automatic forensic voice comparison using deep learning embeddings.
    Sztahó D; Fejes A
    J Forensic Sci; 2023 May; 68(3):871-883. PubMed ID: 36999742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effect of mismatched recording conditions on human and automatic speaker recognition in forensic applications.
    Alexander A; Botti F; Dessimoz D; Drygajlo A
    Forensic Sci Int; 2004 Dec; 146 Suppl():S95-9. PubMed ID: 15639600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evidential value of voice quality acoustics in forensic voice comparison.
    Chan RKW
    Forensic Sci Int; 2023 Jul; 348():111725. PubMed ID: 37182279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Data strategies in forensic automatic speaker comparison.
    van der Vloed D
    Forensic Sci Int; 2023 Sep; 350():111790. PubMed ID: 37567041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. New transformed features generated by deep bottleneck extractor and a GMM-UBM classifier for speaker age and gender classification.
    Mallouh AA; Qawaqneh Z; Barkana BD
    Neural Comput Appl; 2018; 30(8):2581-2593. PubMed ID: 30363735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Refining the relevant population in forensic voice comparison - A response to Hicks et alii (2015) The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions.
    Morrison GS; Enzinger E; Zhang C
    Sci Justice; 2016 Dec; 56(6):492-497. PubMed ID: 27914557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. What should a forensic practitioner's likelihood ratio be? II.
    Morrison GS
    Sci Justice; 2017 Nov; 57(6):472-476. PubMed ID: 29173462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Acoustic hole filling for sparse enrollment data using a cohort universal corpus for speaker recognition.
    Suh JW; Hansen JH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Feb; 131(2):1515-28. PubMed ID: 22352521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Voice disguise and automatic speaker recognition.
    Zhang C; Tan T
    Forensic Sci Int; 2008 Mar; 175(2-3):118-22. PubMed ID: 17646071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Consensus on validation of forensic voice comparison.
    Morrison GS; Enzinger E; Hughes V; Jessen M; Meuwly D; Neumann C; Planting S; Thompson WC; van der Vloed D; Ypma RJF; Zhang C; Anonymous A; Anonymous B
    Sci Justice; 2021 May; 61(3):299-309. PubMed ID: 33985678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Forensic Speaker Verification Using Ordinary Least Squares.
    Machado TJ; Vieira Filho J; de Oliveira MA
    Sensors (Basel); 2019 Oct; 19(20):. PubMed ID: 31658784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.