El Templo Como Microcosmos By Mariana Sissia

Precio habitual
Precio de oferta
Impuesto incluido. Los gastos de envío se calculan en la pantalla de pagos.
La cantidad debe ser 1 o más

Editorial: Big Sur Format: Zine Year: 2014 Country: Argentina Dimensions: 21 X 15 Cm Pages:[40]P Process: Offset-printed Edition Size: 500

A general review of research into the evaluation of mechanical template techniques may be found in Davies and Valentine (2006).[9] A review of research into more modern 'feature' and 'recognition' systems, and into methods for improving the effectiveness of composites, may be found in Frowd et al. (2008)[10] and (2009).[11] The systems used in the UK have been subjected to a number of academic studies. These have typically shown that E-FIT and PRO-fit produce composites that are correctly named, either immediately or a few hours after construction, about 20% of the time (see Brace et al. (2000),[12] Bruce et al. (2002),[13] Davies et al. (2000)[14] and Frowd et al. (2005)[15]). When witnesses in these studies are required to wait two days before constructing a composite, which matches real use more closely, naming falls to a few percent at best (e.g. Frowd et al. [2005][16] and [2007][17][18]). The reason for the low level of naming from these systems appears to be that witnesses are unable to accurately construct the internal features of the face after long delays, the region that is important for recognition by another person later (Frowd et al. [2007][19]). Evolutionary systems show a marked improvement in accuracy. In academic trials, research on a fairly-recent version of the EvoFIT system has shown correct naming levels of about 30% after a 2-day delay (see Frowd et al., 2010).[20] Using more-recent construction techniques, the performance increased to 45% correct naming (Frowd et al., 2012).[21] Using the very latest system, interview and enhancement techniques, naming of an EvoFIT composite is 74% correct (Frowd et al., 2013).[6] Appropriately, the system does appear to behave more like a face recognition than a face recall system (Frowd et al., 2011)[22] Accompanying the development of EvoFIT have been new approaches in the type of interview administered to eyewitnesses prior to face construction (e.g. Frowd et al., 2012).[23] Similarly in extensive field use EFIT-V has shown a 40% naming rate over an 18-month period with 1000 interviews.[24] The EvoFIT system has been similarly evaluated in formal police field-trials.[25] These evaluations have reported a much higher naming rate for EvoFIT composites but, using the latest interview techniques, a suspect arrest rate of 60%. This latest police field trial has also indicated that an EvoFIT directly leads to the arrest of a suspect and then a conviction in 29% of cases.[26] There have been many notable successes - for example, in this investigation, EvoFIT has directly led to the arrest of a serial rapist.[27]