For several decades, legal and scientific scholars have argued that conclusions from forensic examinations should be supported by statistical data and reported within a probabilistic framework. Multiple models have been proposed to quantify and express the probative value of forensic evidence. Unfortunately, the use of statistics to perform inferences in forensic science adds a layer of complexity that most forensic scientists, court offices and lay individuals are not armed to handle. Many applications of statistics to forensic science rely on ad hoc strategies and are not scientifically sound. The opacity of the technical jargon that is used to describe these probabilistic models and their results, and the complexity of the techniques involved make it very difficult for the untrained user to separate the wheat from the chaff. This series of article is intended to help forensic scientists and lawyers recognize limitations and issues in tools proposed to interpret the results of forensic examinations. This article focuses on the tool proposed by the Latent Print Branch of the U.S. Defense Forensic Science Center (DFSC) and called FRStat. In this article, I explore the compatibility of the results outputted by FRStat with the language used by the DFCS to report the conclusions of their fingerprint examinations, as well as the appropriateness of the statistical modelling underpinning the tool and the validation of its performance.

中文翻译：

---

抵御现代艺术：统计的诅咒：第一部分-FRStat

几十年来，法律和科学学者一直认为，法医检查的结论应得到统计数据的支持，并应在概率框架内进行报告。已经提出了多种模型来量化和表达法医证据的证明价值。不幸的是，使用统计数据来进行法医学的推断会增加一层复杂性，大多数法医学家，法院和非专业人士都没有武装来处理。统计学在法医科学中的许多应用都依赖于临时性策略，并且在科学上不够合理。用于描述这些概率模型及其结果的技术术语的不透明性以及所涉及技术的复杂性使得未经培训的用户很难将小麦与谷壳分离。本系列文章旨在帮助法医科学家和律师认识到建议用来解释法医检查结果的工具的局限性和问题。本文重点介绍由美国国防法证科学中心（DFSC）的潜在打印部门提出的名为FRStat的工具。在本文中，我将探讨FRStat输出的结果与DFCS报告其指纹检查结论所使用的语言的兼容性，