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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3722616)

  • 1. Spectrographic voice identification: a forensic survey.
    Koenig BE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1986 Jun; 79(6):2088-90. PubMed ID: 3722616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Distinguishing between forensic science and forensic pseudoscience: testing of validity and reliability, and approaches to forensic voice comparison.
    Morrison GS
    Sci Justice; 2014 May; 54(3):245-56. PubMed ID: 24796954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. [Studies on voice identification].
    Yang X; Shi S; Ling J
    Fa Yi Xue Za Zhi; 1998; 14(4):224-5, 228, 252. PubMed ID: 11938906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accuracy of comparison decisions by forensic firearms examiners.
    Monson KL; Smith ED; Peters EM
    J Forensic Sci; 2023 Jan; 68(1):86-100. PubMed ID: 36183147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Euclidean Distances as measures of speaker similarity including identical twin pairs: A forensic investigation using source and filter voice characteristics.
    San Segundo E; Tsanas A; Gómez-Vilda P
    Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Jan; 270():25-38. PubMed ID: 27912151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Forensic voice comparison and the paradigm shift.
    Morrison GS
    Sci Justice; 2009 Dec; 49(4):298-308. PubMed ID: 20120610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Planning, design and logistics of a decision analysis study: The FBI/Ames study involving forensic firearms examiners.
    Monson KL; Smith ED; Bajic SJ
    Forensic Sci Int Synerg; 2022; 4():100221. PubMed ID: 35243285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Stress and deception in speech: evaluating layered voice analysis.
    Harnsberger JD; Hollien H; Martin CA; Hollien KA
    J Forensic Sci; 2009 May; 54(3):642-50. PubMed ID: 19432740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Testing the accuracy and reliability of palmar friction ridge comparisons - A black box study.
    Eldridge H; De Donno M; Champod C
    Forensic Sci Int; 2021 Jan; 318():110457. PubMed ID: 33239260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. INTERPOL survey of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies.
    Morrison GS; Sahito FH; Jardine G; Djokic D; Clavet S; Berghs S; Goemans Dorny C
    Forensic Sci Int; 2016 Jun; 263():92-100. PubMed ID: 27100858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A review of the experiments involving voiceprint identification.
    Hennessy JJ; Romig CH
    J Forensic Sci; 1971 Apr; 16(2):183-98. PubMed ID: 5557640
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The current status of microscopical hair comparisons.
    Rowe WF
    ScientificWorldJournal; 2001 Dec; 1():868-78. PubMed ID: 12805721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Collaborative study of speaker identiication by the voiceprint method.
    Smrkovski LL
    J Assoc Off Anal Chem; 1975 May; 58(3):453-6. PubMed ID: 1141171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The recovery of trace materials for spectrographic examination using a microbush abrasion technique.
    Evans JA; Waller WN
    J Forensic Sci Soc; 1966 Oct; 6(4):189-91. PubMed ID: 5982072
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The relation between speech tempo, loudness, and fundamental frequency: an important issue in forensic speaker recognition.
    Künzel HJ; Masthoff HR; Köster JP
    Sci Justice; 1995; 35(4):291-5. PubMed ID: 7496828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of the NITV CVSA.
    Hollien H; Harnsberger JD; Martin CA; Hollien KA
    J Forensic Sci; 2008 Jan; 53(1):183-93. PubMed ID: 18279255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.