Latent print examiners often differ in the number of minutiae they mark during analysis of a latent, and also during comparison of a latent with an exemplar. Differences in minutia counts understate interexaminer variability: examiners' markups may have similar minutia counts but differ greatly in which specific minutiae were marked. We assessed variability in minutia markup among 170 volunteer latent print examiners. Each provided detailed markup documenting their examinations of 22 latent-exemplar pairs of prints randomly assigned from a pool of 320 pairs. An average of 12 examiners marked each latent. The primary factors associated with minutia reproducibility were clarity, which regions of the prints examiners chose to mark, and agreement on value or comparison determinations. In clear areas (where the examiner was "certain of the location, presence, and absence of all minutiae"), median reproducibility was 82%; in unclear areas, median reproducibility was 46%. Differing interpretations regarding which regions should be marked (e.g., when there is ambiguity in the continuity of a print) contributed to variability in minutia markup: especially in unclear areas, marked minutiae were often far from the nearest minutia marked by a majority of examiners. Low reproducibility was also associated with differences in value or comparison determinations. Lack of standardization in minutia markup and unfamiliarity with test procedures presumably contribute to the variability we observed. We have identified factors accounting for interexaminer variability; implementing standards for detailed markup as part of documentation and focusing future training efforts on these factors may help to facilitate transparency and reduce subjectivity in the examination process.
Keywords: ACE-V; Biometrics; Fingermark; Latent fingerprint examination; Repeatability; Reproducibility.
Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.