INTERPOL survey of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies

Geoffrey Stewart Morrison; Farhan Hyder Sahito; Gaëlle Jardine; Djordje Djokic; Sophie Clavet; Sabine Berghs; Caroline Goemans Dorny

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.03.044

INTERPOL survey of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies

Geoffrey Stewart Morrison
, Farhan Hyder Sahito^*
, Gaëlle Jardine
, Djordje Djokic
, Sophie Clavet
, Sabine Berghs
, Caroline Goemans Dorny

^*Corresponding author for this work

INTERPOL General Secretariat

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

63 Citations (SciVal)

Abstract

A survey was conducted of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies around the world. A questionnaire was circulated to law enforcement agencies in the 190 member countries of INTERPOL. 91 responses were received from 69 countries. 44 respondents reported that they had speaker identification capabilities in house or via external laboratories. Half of these came from Europe. 28 respondents reported that they had databases of audio recordings of speakers. The clearest pattern in the responses was that of diversity. A variety of different approaches to speaker identification were used: The human-supervised-automatic approach was the most popular in North America, the auditory-acoustic-phonetic approach was the most popular in Europe, and the spectrographic/auditory-spectrographic approach was the most popular in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and South and Central America. Globally, and in Europe, the most popular framework for reporting conclusions was identification/exclusion/inconclusive. In Europe, the second most popular framework was the use of verbal likelihood ratio scales.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	92-100
Number of pages	9
Journal	Forensic Science International
Volume	263
Early online date	1 Apr 2016
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.03.044
Publication status	Published - 1 Jun 2016

Keywords

Forensic voice comparison
INTERPOL
Law enforcement
Speaker identification
Survey

Access to Document

10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.03.044

Cite this

@article{86200e92a02247ea8bcb34acd465a1e0,

title = "INTERPOL survey of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies",

abstract = "A survey was conducted of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies around the world. A questionnaire was circulated to law enforcement agencies in the 190 member countries of INTERPOL. 91 responses were received from 69 countries. 44 respondents reported that they had speaker identification capabilities in house or via external laboratories. Half of these came from Europe. 28 respondents reported that they had databases of audio recordings of speakers. The clearest pattern in the responses was that of diversity. A variety of different approaches to speaker identification were used: The human-supervised-automatic approach was the most popular in North America, the auditory-acoustic-phonetic approach was the most popular in Europe, and the spectrographic/auditory-spectrographic approach was the most popular in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and South and Central America. Globally, and in Europe, the most popular framework for reporting conclusions was identification/exclusion/inconclusive. In Europe, the second most popular framework was the use of verbal likelihood ratio scales.",

keywords = "Forensic voice comparison, INTERPOL, Law enforcement, Speaker identification, Survey",

author = "Morrison, \{Geoffrey Stewart\} and Sahito, \{Farhan Hyder\} and Ga{\"e}lle Jardine and Djordje Djokic and Sophie Clavet and Sabine Berghs and \{Goemans Dorny\}, Caroline",

year = "2016",

month = jun,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.03.044",

language = "English",

volume = "263",

pages = "92--100",

journal = "Forensic Science International",

issn = "0379-0738",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - INTERPOL survey of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies

AU - Morrison, Geoffrey Stewart

AU - Sahito, Farhan Hyder

AU - Jardine, Gaëlle

AU - Djokic, Djordje

AU - Clavet, Sophie

AU - Berghs, Sabine

AU - Goemans Dorny, Caroline

PY - 2016/6/1

Y1 - 2016/6/1

N2 - A survey was conducted of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies around the world. A questionnaire was circulated to law enforcement agencies in the 190 member countries of INTERPOL. 91 responses were received from 69 countries. 44 respondents reported that they had speaker identification capabilities in house or via external laboratories. Half of these came from Europe. 28 respondents reported that they had databases of audio recordings of speakers. The clearest pattern in the responses was that of diversity. A variety of different approaches to speaker identification were used: The human-supervised-automatic approach was the most popular in North America, the auditory-acoustic-phonetic approach was the most popular in Europe, and the spectrographic/auditory-spectrographic approach was the most popular in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and South and Central America. Globally, and in Europe, the most popular framework for reporting conclusions was identification/exclusion/inconclusive. In Europe, the second most popular framework was the use of verbal likelihood ratio scales.

AB - A survey was conducted of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies around the world. A questionnaire was circulated to law enforcement agencies in the 190 member countries of INTERPOL. 91 responses were received from 69 countries. 44 respondents reported that they had speaker identification capabilities in house or via external laboratories. Half of these came from Europe. 28 respondents reported that they had databases of audio recordings of speakers. The clearest pattern in the responses was that of diversity. A variety of different approaches to speaker identification were used: The human-supervised-automatic approach was the most popular in North America, the auditory-acoustic-phonetic approach was the most popular in Europe, and the spectrographic/auditory-spectrographic approach was the most popular in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and South and Central America. Globally, and in Europe, the most popular framework for reporting conclusions was identification/exclusion/inconclusive. In Europe, the second most popular framework was the use of verbal likelihood ratio scales.

KW - Forensic voice comparison

KW - INTERPOL

KW - Law enforcement

KW - Speaker identification

KW - Survey

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84963558413

U2 - 10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.03.044

DO - 10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.03.044

M3 - Article

C2 - 27100858

AN - SCOPUS:84963558413

SN - 0379-0738

VL - 263

SP - 92

EP - 100

JO - Forensic Science International

JF - Forensic Science International

ER -

INTERPOL survey of the use of speaker identification by law enforcement agencies

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this