skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 98311 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Review of Fingerprint Individuality Models
Author(s): D Stoney
Date Published: 1984
Page Count: 67
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 82-IJ-CX-0023
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This study reviews and critiques the mathematical models for the probabilistic estimate of fingerprint individuality developed by Galton (1892), Henry/Balthazard (1900/1911), Roxburgh (1933), Amy (1946), Trauring (1963), Kingston (1964), and Osterburg et al. (1977).
Abstract: Each of the models presented attempts to provide a mathematical analysis of the degree of individuality present in a fingerprint pattern. The theoretical principles and mathematical equations for each model are presented, followed by a review of other researchers' criticisms of the model and the author's own assessment. Modifications of the basic models considered are also reviewed. These include (1) minor modifications of the Henry/Balthazard approach made by Bose (1917), by Wentworth and Wilder (1918), and by Cummins and Midlo (1943); and (2) the extension of Osterburg's method by Sclove (1979, 1980). In a summary criticism of a number of the models, the author advises that any fingerprint has a variety of identifiable minutia configurations and that variation in minutia type must be addressed in the comparison process. He further notes that the Osterburg et al., Kingston, Amy, Tauring, and Henry/Balthazard models fail to provide for this essential feature of fingerprint comparison. Twenty-three references are listed.
Index Term(s): Critiques; Fingerprint classification; Fingerprints; Mathematical modeling
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=98311

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.