Extending the discussion on inconsistency in forensic decisions and results.

The subject of inter- and intra-laboratory inconsistency was recently raised in a commentary by Itiel Dror. We re-visit an inter-laboratory trial, with which some of the authors of this current discussion were associated, to diagnose the causes of any differences in the likelihood ratios (LRs) assigned using probabilistic genotyping software. Some of the variation was due to different decisions that would be made on a case-by-case basis, some due to laboratory policy and would hence differ between laboratories, and the final and smallest part was the run-to-run difference caused by the Monte Carlo aspect of the software used.

An inter-laboratory comparison of probabilistic genotyping parameters and evaluation of performance on DNA mixtures from different laboratories.

Probabilistic genotyping (PG) is becoming the preferred standard for evidence interpretation, amongst forensic DNA laboratories, especially those in the United States. Various groups have expressed concern about reliability of PG systems, especially for mixtures beyond two contributors. Studies involving interlaboratory testing of known mixtures have been identified as ways to evaluate the reliability of PG systems.

Study of CTS DNA Proficiency Tests with Regard to DNA Mixture Interpretation: A NIST Scientific Foundation Review.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology has released a document entitled DNA Mixture Interpretation: A NIST Scientific Foundation Review for public comment. This has become known as the Draft NIST Foundation Review. It contains the statement: "Across these 69 data sets, there were 80 false negatives and 18 false positives reported from 110,408 possible responses (27,602 participants × two evidence items × two reference items).