Forensic strength of evidence statements should preferably be likelihood ratios calculated using relevant data, quantitative measurements, and statistical models – a response to Lennard (2013) Fingerprint identification: How far have we come?
Mismatched distances from speakers to telephone in a forensic-voice-comparison case
Enzinger, E. (2013). Proceedings of the 21st International Congress on Acoustics, Montréal, Proceedings of Meetings Online. vol. 19, paper 060039. doi:10.1121/1.4805425
Fusion of multiple formant-trajectory- and fundamental-frequency-based forensic-voice-comparison systems: Chinese /ei1/, /ai2/, and /iau1/
Zhang C., & Enzinger E. (2013). Proceedings of the 21st International Congress on Acoustics, Montréal, Proceedings of Meetings Online. vol. 19, paper 060044 doi:10.1121/1.4798793
Effects of telephone transmission on the performance of formant-trajectory-based forensic voice comparison – female voices
Reliability of human-supervised formant-trajectory measurement for forensic voice comparison
Zhang, C., Morrison, G. S., Ochoa, F., Enzinger E. (2013). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 133, EL54–EL60. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14209-3_11
Vowel inherent spectral change in forensic voice comparison
Morrison, G. S. (2013). In G. S. Morrison & P. F. Assmann (Eds.) Vowel inherent spectral change (pp. 263–283). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14209-3_11
The importance of using between-session test data in evaluating the performance of forensic-voice-comparison systems
Human-supervised and fully-automatic formant-trajectory measurement for forensic voice comparison – Female voices
Zhang, C., Morrison, G. S., Enzinger, E., Ochoa, F. (2012). Laboratory Report. Forensic Voice Comparison Laboratory, School of Electrical Enginerring & Telecommunications, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. download
Tutorial on logistic-regression calibration and fusion: Converting a score to a likelihood ratio
Response to Draft Australian Standard: DR AS 5388.3 Forensic analysis - Part 3 - Interpretation
Morrison, G. S., Evett, I. W., Willis, S. M., Champod, C., Grigoras, C., Lindh, J., Fenton, N., Hepler, A., Berger, C. E. H., Buckleton, J. S., Thompson, W. C. , González-Rodríguez, J., Neumann, C., Curran, J. M., Zhang, C., Aitken, C. G. G., Ramos, D., Lucena-Molina, J. J., Jackson, G., Meuwly, D., Robertson, B., Vignaux, G. A. (2012). http://forensic-evaluation.net/australian-standards/#Morrison_et_al_2012
Database selection for forensic voice comparison
Morrison, G. S., Ochoa, F., & Thiruvaran, T. (2012). Proceedings of Odyssey 2012: The Language and Speaker Recognition Workshop, Singapore, 62–77. http://geoff-morrison.net/#FVC
Voice source features for forensic voice comparison – an evaluation of the Glottex® software package
Enzinger, E., Zhang, C., & Morrison, G. S. (2012). Proceedings of Odyssey 2012: The Language and Speaker Recognition Workshop, Singapore, 78–85. http://geoff-morrison.net/#FVC including Errata & Addenda
What did Bain really say? A preliminary forensic analysis of the disputed utterance based on data, acoustic analysis, statistical models, calculation of likelihood ratios, and testing of validity
Morrison, G. S., & Hoy, M. C. (2012). Proceedings of the 46th Audio Engineering Society (AES) Conference on Audio Forensics: Recording, Recovery, Analysis, and Interpretation, Denver, CO, 203–207. http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16331
Protocol for the collection of databases of recordings for forensic-voice-comparison research and practice
Morrison, G. S., Rose, P., & Zhang, C. (2012). Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 44, 155–167. doi:10.1080/00450618.2011.630412
The likelihood-ratio framework and forensic evidence in court: A response to R v T
Zhang, C., Morrison, G.S., & Thiruvaran. T. (2011). Proceedings of the17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, China, 2280–2283. http://geoff-morrison.net/#FVC
Humans versus machine: Forensic voice comparison on a small database of Swedish voice recordings
Lindh, J., & Morrison, G.S. (2011). Proceedings of the17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, China, 1254–1257. http://geoff-morrison.net/#FVC
Measuring the validity and reliability of forensic likelihood-ratio systems
A comparison of procedures for the calculation of forensic likelihood ratios from acoustic-phonetic data: Multvariate kernel density (MVKD) versus Gaussian mixture model – universal background model (GMM-UBM)
An issue in the calculation of logistic-regression calibration and fusion weights for forensic voice comparison
Morrison, G. S., Thiruvaran, T., Epps, J. (2010). In M. Tabain, J. Fletcher, D., Grayden, J. Hajek, & A. Butcher (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, Melbourne (pp. 74–77). Australasian Speech Science and Technology Association. http://assta.org/sst/SST-10/SST2010/PDF/AUTHOR/ST100042.PDF
Estimating the precision of the likelihood-ratio output of a forensic-voice-comparison system
Morrison, G. S., Thiruvaran, T., Epps, J. (2010). In H. Cernocký and L. Burget (Eds.), Proceedings of Odyssey 2010: The Language and Speaker Recognition Workshop, Brno, Czech Republic (pp. 63–70). International Speech Communication Association. http://www.isca-speech.org/archive_open/odyssey_2010/od10_012.html
A response to the UK position statement on forensic speaker comparison
Rose, P., & Morrison, G. S. (2009). International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 16, 139–163. doi:10.1558/ijsll.v16i1.139
FM features for automatic forensic speaker recognition
Thiruvaran, T., Ambikairajah, E., & Epps, J. (2008). In Proceedings of Odyssey 2010: Proceedings of Interspeech 2008 Incorporating SST 2008 (pp. 1497–1500). International Speech Communication Association. http://www.isca-speech.org/archive/interspeech_2008/i08_1497.html