WYRED Project: References
Aitken, C. G. G. and Lucy, D. (2004). Evaluation of trace evidence in the form of multivariate date. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 53, (1), pp. 109-122.
Aitken, C. G. G. and Taroni, F. (2004). Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists (2nd ed.). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Brown, G. and Wormald, J. (2014). Speaker Profiling: An automated method? Paper presented at the International Association of Forensic Phonetics and Acoustics (IAFPA) conference. Zurich, Switzerland.
Earnshaw, K. (2014) Unpublished, University of York; MSc thesis.
Enzinger, E. and Morrison, G. S. (2012). The importance of using between-session test data in evaluating the performance of forensic-voice-comparison systems. In Proceedings of the 14th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, pp. 137-140.
Fecher, N. (2012). The ‘Audio-Visual Face Cover Corpus’: Investigations into audio-visual speech and speaker recognition when the speaker’s face is occluded by facewear. Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (InterSPEECH), Portland, Oregon, USA.
French, J. P., Nolan, F., Foulkes, P., Harrison, P. and McDougall, K. (2010). The UK position statement on forensic speaker comparison: a rejoinder to Rose and Morrison. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 17 (1), pp. 143-152.
Gold, E., French, P. and Harrison, P. (2013). Clicking behaviour as a possible speaker discriminant in English, Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 43 (3), pp. 339-349.
Gold, E. and French, P. (2011). International Practices in Forensic Speaker Comparison, International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 18 (2).
Gold, E. and Hughes, V. (2014). Issues and opportunities: The application of the numerical likelihood ratio framework to forensic speaker comparison, Science and Justice, 54 (4), pp. 292-299.
House of Commons’ Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (2009). Cross-border Co-operation between the Governments of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland: Second Report of Session 2008-2009.
London: The Stationery Office.
Hudson, T., de Jong, G., McDougall, K., Harrison, P., and Nolan, F. (2007). F0 statistics for 100 young male speakers of Standard Southern British English. In 16th Proceedings of the International Congress of Phoentic Sciences, Saarbrücken, pp. 1809-1812.
current telephone quality f0 analysis currently being carried out by Hudson
Hughes in progress
Kavanagh, C. (2013). New Consonantal Acoustic Parameters for Forensic Speaker Comparison. Unpublished; University of York, PhD.
King et al 2013
Law Commission of England and Wales (2011). Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales. No. 325.
Morrison, G. S. (2012) which one??
Morrison, G. S. (2007). MatLab implementation of Aitken and Lucy’s (2004) forensic likelihood ratio software using multivariate-kernel-density estimation. Downloaded: December 2011.
National Research Council (2009). Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward. Washington, D. C.: The National Academic Press.
Nolan, F., McDougall, K., de Jong, G. and Hudson, T. (2009). The DyViS database: style-controlled recordings of 100 homogenous speakers for forensic phonetic research. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 16(1), pp. 31-57.
Office of National Statistics (2011)
Rose, P. (2002). Forensic speaker identification. London: Taylor-Francis Ltd.
Rose, P. and Morrison, G. (2009). A response to the UK position statement on forensic speaker comparison. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 16(1), pp. 139-163.
Stevens, L. and French, P. (2012). Voice quality in standard southern British English: distribution of features, inter-speaker variability, and the effect of telephone transmission. Paper presented at the Conference of the International Association of Forensic Phonetics and Acoustics. Santander, Spain.
Wood et al (2014)