Forensic cent Inematonl ot Gon) napus Contents lists available at ScienceDirect eo Forensic Science International ELSEVIER journal homepage: wow elsevier.com/locatelforsi Towards more relevance in forensic science research and development Céline Weyermann *, Sheila Willis °, Pierre Margot °, Claude Roux © lees Sees Cmts, Unters Lausanne, Seana > teenie Resear Cente for Foes See Unies of Dune, Uk Cane for Frese Sec, nes of Tecaloy Spey, strat ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Received 23 August 2022 Received in reise om 3 Jamar 2023 ‘Accepted 1 Febwury 2023 Many diferent issues have been identified in forensic science for more than 10 years. While quality management has often been suggested a8 a path forward, research is generally considered as an essential pat ofthe solution, Through an overview of current forensic selence research this paper aims at evaluating FF and how research answer the challenges forensic science ie curenty facing. While forensic related Publications have massively increased over the years, approximately ha ofthe publications weve published ae In non-forensic sources, indicating that forensic science research tends to be le by ther disciplines. Over a ‘the years, forensic science research has remained largely oriented towards methodological and technolo- Leds sical development rather than relevance tothe forensic scence discipline and practice. Practical int tabiiey plementation ofthe techniques is rarely discussed rom a forensic perspective, and thus research rarely Trae ‘move from the “proof-of-concept” stage to its wtilstion in case investigation The distal transformation Persistence als generated a massive increase of data, making it challenging to find the relevant pieces ef information in Prevalence ‘the mass of forensic" publications avilable on-line. Thus, we propose to refocus forensic science research Purpose ‘on forensic fundamental and practical questions to strengthen the discipline and its impact on crime in Techoooey vestigation and security issues. Our propestions represent an incentive to further discuss forensic science research and knowledge transmission through the definition of a common culture within the community, focusing on common fundamental knowledge such a a beter understating ofthe concept of race adits ‘ease-based information content. '© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier BV. This an open access article unde the CC BY-NC-ND license (itp|(reativecommons orgicenses/by-ne-nd/4.0)) 1. Introduction research effort largely technical rather than theoretical” [| Kik also Calls for more and better research in forensic science have reg ularly been raised among and outside the forensic science commu- nity [1-7]. While research has been uniformly identified as crucial to continuously improve and develop forensic science, there seem to be 8 disparity of opinion about the type of research considered as vital, for forensic science [1-4-6.8). There is also a gap between what research should be cared out and what is actually undertaken, For Some, quality management and technical innovation need to be Priortised (2.3.10), while for others forensic science fundamental principles [1,4.11-14] or practice oriented research [78,116] should be addressed in priority. Relatively early, Kirk noted that che body of knowledge which ‘exists in criminalistcs' was “constantly being increased by a moderate Coresponding autor mal ares cine weyenanneunic (Weyermann). + Inthis paper we donot ake any distinction between the terms “criminals and “orensc cence” Pesse cons the Syne Delattion fora dete definition (owe eral) tps: oto 101016) orscin. 202511592 suggested that "Research, so essential roan active science, cannot re main undefined in its objectives, nor limited to technical progress ‘alone’. Later, Kind observed that scientists were driven by the need (© publish for their own advancement, diverting them trom the complex study of crime investigation [3] (rarely explicable by precise Scientific rules as each case is known Co be unique 4). According to King, this explained the particularly high “emphasis on laboratory studies of forensic" problems which are of such litle practical value, that one is forced to conclude thatthe “forensic” aspect of such research has been thought upto provide a justification for carrying out". He added that "many ofthese studies (were doubtless) praiseworthy and fesirable in a pure science or commercial context, buc they (were) hardly productive in terms of crime investigation”. Recently, an inter- national group of forensic scientists confirmed that...) @ shared understanding and broad acceptance of te essence of forensic science, its purpose, and fundamental principles are stilt missing or mis-re- presented” (11), Margot and other forensic scientists also suggested hat forensic science needed a sound scientific structure, before quality “controls (often a poor replacement for competence |) and ethics” are to be introduced [4.9.12 (0379-07380 2021 The Atha.) Publishes by lever BV. This it an open acces ticle une the CC BY-NC-ND license rstissommonsorisenssy-a-n440). Please cite this article as: , Weyermann, S. Willis, P. Margot et a, Towards more relevance in forensic science research and development, Forensic Science International, hip /di.org/ 10.1016). orseint.2029.111592Weyermann SW, Margo ta able Fores Scene Itermaxonal x () Number of publications found with te keywords Yrens” othe yar 2019 using ferent scaring engines uly 202) A search made 2020 rested i sghty oer urs for some searching es, ing anstanond etroatv fre o the alin Stabs While Ie aad mums eps ese i me te orders of maguade remained compare ‘Searching engines ‘uriter of Yorensiepubications referenced forthe ear 201 ‘Scopus (2020) pwn scopascom Scopus (2022) ps senscopascom Web of Since itp wu seotscience com [US naonal brary of medicine ps: pubmed... gov) Senet ipswmscencediet ot Springer htpsjpraspringecom) Wie sonny ieycom) Google scarfs: cla gongcom ma ae S603 S07 127000 This paper aims at evaluating if more research has been carried ‘outin forensic science inthe past years before addressing what kind of research is currently undertaken, While acknowledging that the situation varies in cfferent jurisdictions, this paper does not address these differences but rather seeks 10 use the. findings to discuss the challenges forensic science research is, ‘currently facing, and suggest what research would sustain forensic science as a discipline with multiple purposes [1.12], not limited to the application of technology ftom other disciplines or the pre- sentation of findings in Court, 2. Methodology ‘The search for forensic science publications has mainly been carried out through literature surveys using Scopus. The keyword “forensic” was seafched for either in the tile, abstract, Keyword oF source title (see Section 2). This gave an overview of publications covering forensic science published each year until 2021. The search ‘was carried out in 2020 (up to 2019) and! in 2022 (up to 2021). The type and numbers of categories constantly evolve in Scopus. Thus, the categories used to search for publications changed slightly be- tween 2020 and 2022. In 2020, the selected source categories to search for “Torensic™ publications included aracles, conference pro- ceedings, reviews, conference papers, communications, and editorials, ‘hile in 2002 it included article, reviews, editorials, conference pa- pers and reviews, book chapters, Books, shor surveys and data papers. For example, conference proceedings and communications did not ‘exist as categories anymore in Scopus in 2022. However, the ob- tained results remained close with 8289 vs, 9475 “forensic” pub- lications indexed for the year 2019 for the two searches carried out in 2020 and 2022, respectively (see Table 1). The difference can also be explained by the fact that sources are retroactively added t0 Scopus thus constantly increasing the number of available publica- tions even for past years. For example, the Egyptian Journal of For- ‘ensic Sciences has been launched in 2011 but was not indexed in Scopus in 2020 yet. This represented a total of 475 additional pub- Tications for the 2022 search (including 68 for the year 2019). For comparison purpose, other searching tools were also tested in, 2022 using the keyword “forensic” in all categories for the year 2019 (see Table |), 7228 “forensic” publications were found in the web of science, while 8603 were indexed in the US national library of med- ‘cine. Other tools being too specitic to a publisher, generally led to lower number of publications being indexed (for example, 6137 for Sciencedirect, 6017 for Springer, 4002 for Wiley). Only google scholar led to a much higher number ef “forensic” publications as 127°000 Manuscripts. were indexed for 2019. This is probably due to Searching options, a the google searching tool looked for the word forensic” anywhere inthe text and in al languages. ‘The present survey did not aim at being exhaustive and is not centicely specific either. Some papers indexed in Scopus as “forensic are not forensic (ie, false positive results), while some are “forensic™ but will be indexed more specifically as “legal medicine” of “criminalistes" (Le, false negative results). However, the order of ‘magnitude gives an idea of the yearly number of publications in forensic science and provides a comparison basis with other dis- ciplines (see Section 4), Further, 2 detailed study was made for gunshot residue and questioned documents using review papers from the Interpol International Forensic Science Managers Symposium’ (see Section 5) 3. Forensic science research in numbers ‘The number of forensic science-related publications has mas- sively inereased in the last 60 years (Fi. 1). This inreasing trend was particularly marked over the last 20 years with more than 9000 ublications released in 2019 compared to the approximately 2000, Published in 1999. The number of sources in which scientific articles have been published has more than tripled in the same period (see ‘Table 2). Ibis however difficult, given the numbers, to ascertain that all articles containing the term “forensic” in the tile, keywords, abstract or source name were significantly related t0 forensic sc fence, More than half ofthe sources, including the word "forensic" in their title were of a medical nature (including very specialized journals focused on Forensic Nursing or Forensic Odonto-stomatology). Excluding medical sources, only general forensic journals (eg. For- ensie Science Inermational Science & Justice and Jountal of Forensic Sciences) were available in 1999, while an increasing number of specialized journals appeared in following years such as Environ- ‘mental Forensics, Forensic Chemistry, Forensic Engineering ot Forensic Architecture, Forensic journals with a digital focus started to appear in 2009 (eg, Digital Investigation and Intemational Journal of Digital Crime and Forensics). Some sources and publications were writen in other languages than English (eg. "Fa yi xue 2a zhi, °Z Zagadnien Nauk Sadowyeh” and “Revue Internationale de Criminologie et de Police Technique et Scientifique”). Only a small percentage (3-4%) of sources in which “Torensic” articles were published include the term "Torensic" in theie ttle (eg, Forensic. Science International, Journal of Forensic Sciences) (see “Table 2). However, approximately half ofthe “forensic” articles were published in those "forensic" journals. When other sources linked to forensic science were included (eg, Science & Justice, International Journal of Legal Medicine, Journal of Medical Entomology or Digival investigation’), the percentage of “forensic” articles published in forensic related journal reached approximately 60%. However, a significant number of "forensic articles are still published in largely 7 ap frmwinterpolinHom-we-worForenssForensc Symposium (st ae cess gus 2022) gay abe 222i" ls «Chinese Forensic Medical Journal, "2 Zagalen Nauk Sadonyennie’ is 3 posh joins saressing problems in jen scence nd “Reve Inerationale de Cimiologie ede Police Technique et Scien” an lngematonal renc-speakngjumal of iminlogy and forensic scence purl such a “Medi, Scence andthe Law "Pong, La, probity ands" ona and Human Behaviour were no conser 3 ry forensic reliedWeyermann SW, Margo ta inforensi cance (WS repo. \ pbscatons| "9601970 1980-1990 2000 20102020 Fig 1 A tral of 183716 publications were elerenced in Scopus between 1060 and 2001 With the word "ores inthe ie eywords,abstact or joural name. While Snexponentally increasing number ef ren: papers ave been published ove the years sce rd ne tev eno eidence mat he NAS port [2] ade icant npc atter 2008 mare to oter main dives (eg puis and perish prac) Tn 2020 tere was a massive lntease cmmared 192019 and 2021 This maybe aS fect of the shutdown dig the acute phase ofthe CAD: 19 panei; may ‘esearcers had mae tne to pubsh data that had bee colcted is previous eas (Source: Scops 2022) Some nunbecs about rensepubcations, artes apd sources eeenced a Scopus tenyeats Deore ander the ease ote NAS eon 209 (Source: opts 2020, dries ae reser pages we putin asa iio review o conference papers ce metodo Seon for deta), 19992000 2000 1 of Toren publiations| bam sss 280 4 oF Toren” ead 2062623 4 open aces “Toren” ates sy m5 {open acess “rene” atles in ie 4 sources in whi "ores atices were tao sot 8 ashe ‘Esoares with ores” inte mR unrelated journals (eg, PLoS ONE, Scientffe reports or Analytical Chemistry), This may partly be explained by the fact that forensic Journals generally have lower impact factors than journals from ‘other disciplines.’ For the year 2019, 89 “forensic” articles were ‘detected in 32 sources containing the word “chemistry” in their ttle (Forensic chemistry excluded). The fact that unrelated journals con- ‘ain up (0 60% of articles published on fingermark research was also mentioned in the review papers of the 19th INTERPOL international Forensic Science Managers Symposium (17) The number of open-access articles has also significantly in- creased during the last few years, and this increasing trend will undoubtedly continue given the new open-access policy of many universities and funding agencies. However, only articles that are freely accessible directly from the publishers were accounted for in ‘Table 2. Many authors enable green open access to pre-print or post- print versions of their manuscripts through non-commercial 1e- Positories (respecting embargo periods). Thus, the mentioned 33% Fatio of open-access articles in 2019 is probably. largely * Impact factors of scenic Joumals are suse fom the numb fies the rape aici as been cited ove year For example in 2020, Analy! Chemsry ad an impact ator of 646, wile the highest impact factor among forensicsclence Journals was 2305 for Forensic Scene fteratoal (source: hp: academic- ace ‘atoecominpac-of uralfnaia-Chemisty and hps:academie ace ‘ratorcomimpact-fJurmal Forensic Sciencelterational, st ces: June 2022) Fores Scene Itermaxonal x () underestimated. The number of open-access “forensic” articles reached 40% for the year 2021 4. big data, ‘While forensic science might be expected t0 rejoice in the gen- eral increase of published research, experienced academics will probably agree that a "publish or perish” science paradigm may have led to an increased number of irrelevant ar less impactful publica- tions (as already mentioned by Kind (8. Excluding the 2020 peak probably due to the COVID-19 lockdown (see Fig. 1), the observed exponentially increasing trend is not specific to forensic science research (see Fig. 2) and reveal a big data issue all scientists (and our society at large) are facing nowadays.” How is it possible to keep track of the relevant literature with, such numbers? Indeed, how can a scientist gain an overview of the forensic science feld, when several thousands of articles are pub- lished each year thfough recognised publishers (see Table 1)? Reading one article per day is largely insufficient ~ and most re- searchers will concentrate on reading the articles they co-author fist [18]. Thus, we largely rely on searching engines (Le. algorithms) {ofind relevant papers in our sub-disciplne(s), Knowing that looking too broadly will yield too many articles (ie. false positives), while looking 0 specifically will not allow us to find al relevant articles, (ie, false negative), The number of sources in which forensic papers are published also complicate the matter as new (often open source) journals are proliferating, adding to the general background noise ‘Thus, many articles are brought to our knowledge through estab- lished networks and, increasingly, social media, thus redefining our 'searching” strategies in an increasingly digital work environment. In this new searching paradigm, the question of biased search stra tegies should also be considered.’ Once we have gathered the re levant articles from all available sources, we still ned to find time to further triage and read them (often using fast reading techniques and potentially losing some of tie sense meant by the authors). Review papers aim at helping scientists gain an overview of their field, According to Scopus, 625 reviews containing the word "for- ensic” in their title, keywords or abstracts were published in the year 2021 (see fig 2), More than 6OX of these reviews were related to (forensic) medicine, and only 35% were published in forensic related sources. Given the number of reviews published each year in for- ensic science, itis essentially impossible to keep up with forensic science research at large since the 90." 5. Research topics ‘This "big daca environment" is furthering the isolation of scien- tists in specialised silos [12,19] (a8 also shown by the multiplication of ultra-specialised forensic sources such as Forensic Chemistry or Forensic Science International: Animals and Environments. Thus, each scientist remains only (and barely) aware ofthe research carried out In their research field, which is not anymore “forensic science" but rather a specialist domain with potential applications to forensic science questions (eg. forensic geology or soils). However, even © The ackoelvanc of essach wale obsered byexpet nates dsplines, for example on COVID-19 For gamble, he German expert on eoconais Christan Dosen tated in Api 2020 rat you cul ead eeu 0 atic) before you find Something tars actualy Solan resting Ale of research resumes ae Dein wwe” (tps: we theparan.com worl 2000 apologist ‘tosten-germany- coronavirus exper nerve, ast aces: AUB! 2022) ° The bert averted escareh wl ater much more ation with he sks assacited wit cronyism ad Nasty trends over sient reevance ad qual. * Goo and book chaps such s Encyclopedia) were not considered while some ‘aa aio be considered as reviews of forensic scene knowledge. 1128 “oense™ books (42 published In 2021) and 4780 Bok chapters 175 pubished in 2021) were index Scop6 Weyerman SW, Margo ta Hil. POPP L OA LUI. Teche Comoiter Ot ig. 2. Absolute numbers (above) and percentages (below) fates asa function of| ‘the seach wos used nthe eyo or asract sina Inrease can be bsered transversally in the Ls 50 yar. The growth was paroclariy masked for “ectnology” and “gal” elated ates Soure:Senpus 2022) 700 00. rovers eee ee o Fig. 3. Forensic relted reviews pulsed each yar between 1665 and 2021, Mace ‘than 100 Tore" reviews were pulsed eacn ear ater 1095, an oer 4003 year sine 2018, Soure: Scopus 2022) ‘when considering specific forensic traces, the numbers of published articles and reviews have considerably increased, especially in re- ent years (See Fig. 4). For the year 2021, the following forensic “specialised” publications were referenced in Scopus ® Wen two Keyworts are use Scopus, publestionsicuding both ermsin the tie abstract or eyo are seach for Fores Scene Itermaxonal x () $00 450 350 300 250 200 150 | 50 os | _al all 3991-2000 20012010 2011.2020 reviews 21990 GSR mFingerorint mighal MONA Fig. 4 Number of reviews inculing the wonds “gunshot eesiue” (GSR), “forensic fingerprint agtal forensic” or “orensc DNA the tite, abstract or keywords Scopus over 10 years peo, = 743 articles and 76 reviews (9%) on “forensic DNA", = 589 articles and 36 reviews (6%) on “digital forensics" = 194 articles and 28 reviews (13%) on “forensic fingerprint’ ~ 37 attiles and 11 reviews (23%) on "gunshot residue’ ‘Thus, compared to research articles, a relatively high percentage of reviews were published in forensie sub-discipines, either as an attempt to keep track of new knowledge, orto pursue the “publish or perish” injunction as reviews generally gather more attention (and hus, citations) than research articles, “The addressed subjects and content of the reviews are very dis- parate, arely assessing reported research from a critical or practical point of view (ee for example the GSR reviews published in 2021 in “able 3), Readers are thus often left t0 do the “triage” of relevance and quality assessment by themselves. While this may not be an issue Tor most experienced researchers (except fo lac of ime). it is challenging for students and inexperienced post-graduate re searchers. Interestingly, we often observe that students use recent low-quality or irrelevant articles and reviews as starting point for their research, thus sometimes furthering poor quality, undefined ‘objectives and low information stience, while Key research become lost in the background noise. These issues will be further discussed in the next section, through specific examples taken from gunshot residue and questioned document research. 5.1, Gunshot residue (CSR) 637 articles were indexed in Scopus for “gunshot residue” be- ‘ween 1981 and 2021, An automatic search for GSR “transfer” "persistence", “prevalence” and “interpretation” articles aver the same 40 years period provided 54, 26, 19 and 51 articles, respec- tively, Thus, approximately 22% of the published papers addressed What is often considered as fundamental forensic science topics [20-22] This tendency was confirmed by the last detailed review of gunshot residue papers carried out for 19% Interpol International Forensic Science Managers Symposium {23 (see Fig. 5~ let), A total of ‘90 publications were listed between 2016 and 2018 (ca. 20 per year) Among those, 48% focused on the method, while 22% addressed trace characteristics, prevalence and persistence: 14% discussed in- Cerpretation, and 30% addressed other topics (mainly the design of luminescent or doped ammunition and the estimation of the time since discharge). A detailed study of the 37 “gunshot residue" art cles referenced in Scopus for 2021 was also conducted |24-00]. 18, (Le. approximately 50%) ofthese articles were published in forensic Science sources. A close look to the article contents revealed that ‘more than half of those papers focused on method development,Weyermann SW, Margo ta ble Fores Scene Itermaxonal x () Te ofthe reviews published on zunshoresius” in 2021 (Source: Scopus 2022, Specoscopic (anata) approach o gunshot esdue analyse or shooting tance estimation Viratonal specvoscopy abd chemometis in CSR: review and cures ead Snot residue ceeon tecnologia even ‘eens in Gunshot Reside Detection by Electrochemical Method fo Forensic Purpose Advances and ination nthe determistion and ssetsment of gunsior esi inthe environment Persistence Detection of Organic Gursnot Resid na Frenie Investigtion: A Review Fist lesen rearing te ta aay of gone ree traces acy lve iN TIADB Paperssed microfuge devless: Onsite tals Yr cme scene Investigation Environmental and beat hazards of malkary metal polation Resaren ropes on Tic INA on Cari Cassin Foren Fes Forensic applications of DARTS: A review af cent ieatte Interpol (2016-2018) Scopus (2021) Interpretation Fi 5. Resear aces 0 “unsaid” nde in he Ince review papers (2016-2018) (ef ive, Aas. = 90) and in SeOpUE oF 2021 (Ft - Be Ma = 37> ‘optimisation or evaluation (see Fig. 5 - right). Approximately 30% of the articles addressed the questions of trace characterisation, transfer or prevalence, while none addressed persistence in 2021 Four articles were related to environmental issues (contamination of soils of animals), while the last paper was a review rather than a research paper [54 ‘Aauick perusal ofthe 11 reviews published on “gunshot residue” in 2021 indicate that only seven reviews are specific to GSR (see titles 1-7 in Table 3). but this is still a considerable percentage [1-71]. Four out of the seven GSR reviews focus on (often very specific) methods. The remaining four have other main topics (i.e. crime scene investigation, military pollution, touch DNA and DART- Ms application). Scanning Electron Microscopy with Energy Dispersive X-Ray ‘Analysis (SEM-EDX or EDS) was proposed in the 1970s for the analysis of GSR [72-74] and has since then been implemented for the Screening of GSR inorganic particles in many forensic laboratories [23.75-77. In the past 40 years (1981-2021), a total of 142 articles ‘on “gunshot residue” also mentioned “SEM-EDX" or “SEM-EDS" in their ttle abstract of Keywords." This represents only 22% of the total number of articies published on GSR and referenced in Scopus. In 2021, 9 articles (24%) reported the use of SEM-EDX, sometimes in ‘combination with other techniques such as Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) or Laser Inéuced Breakdown ‘Spectroscopy (LIBS) [39.40], Thus, over the years, many alternatives to SEM-EDX have been proposed and most research articles (over 70%) facused on the development of implementation of novel ana- lytical approaches, either co propose alternatives (e.g. Laser Induced “The numbers are indicate. s some articles mention SEM-EDK a5 the meted of reference fr GSR sala nthe abstract but dono plement iin thi esearch, ‘wt hers do ot mention SEMEN in hei, astat or yoo we hey {9 implement the metos Breakdown Spectroscopy) of to expand the targeted trace char- acteristics and purposes (eg, from inorganic to organic GSR, 10 es- timate the shooting distance or time) [20.22,78-82). If we exclude other currently applied approaches (e.g. the shooting distance es- timation, routinely applied in practice, represented 9% of the articles, published between 2016 and 2018 (23)), many research projects have relatively little to no impact on forensic science practice, as SEM-EDX is still the method of choice in most forensic laboratories, for the analysis of GSR. Several hypotheses may explain this gap between research and practice and will be discussed below (in Section 5.3), 5.2. Questioned document ‘The review papers from the 17%, 18" and 19! Interpol International Forensic Science Managers Symposium listed 743 articles in the field of questioned documents between 2010 and 2019 (about 80 per year) [78-80]. Approximately one-third of the papers pub- lished during that period focused on the study of handwriting (in- cluding digital signatures), while another third targeted inks, toners and papers. 12% and 10% of the publication focused on dating issues (including the determination of the writing sequence) and security documents, respectively (see Fiz. 6)-The remaining 19% represented smaller categories such as seals, latent writings, quality insurance or reviews, Only, 25% of the ink differentiation studies were published in forensic sources between 2016 and 2018 [83 While ink analysis is carried out only in a small amount of questioned document cases (at least compared to handwriting comparison and security document examination, itstil represents significant amount of publications in the Meld (84.85] (see Fig. 5). practice, ink analysis is mainly carried out using relatively simple ‘prical methods such as filtered light examination or byperspectral imaging (64). However, a high percentage (at least 80%) of theWeyermann SW, Margo ta Interpol (2010-2018) Handwriting = Weng instruments Security documents sinking Paper Fi. 6 743 aces were cefeenced in the feld of questioned documents between 2010 and 201. Suc a searh cannot be qu cared out using searching engines Such e Scopus asthe words "document and" ae equety used nal nde of forensic publications unrelted oquestonet documents Source: Inerpol Review Pape (25-50, reported papers on ink analysis focused on more advanced spec trometric or separation techniques (such as Raman spectroscopy. Fourier Transform Infra-Red spectroscopy. capillary electrophoresis, liquid chromatography, and diverse mass spectrometric approacies [85,85)) Similarly, to gunshot residue, it is interesting to investigate ‘why there is such a large gap between practice and research. 153, From research to practice? ‘The previous sections highlighted a large gap between research and practice, indicating either that most research is not answering practical needs orfand that practice does not easly adapt ro research, ‘outcomes (9), There might indeed be some delay between proof-of- ‘cancept studies and their validation for practical implementation, However, 40 years of research in the GSR field has brought little ‘change a5 the residue is still mainly analysed using SEM-EDX. Si- milly ink has been examined for years using simple filtered light, ‘options. While the instruments themselves evolved, the techniques remained based on the same physical and optical principles. Thus, the implementation state of esearch seems ta point to other issues that will be investigated in the following paragraphs: + Proof-of-concept studies: Research rarely move beyond the “proof-of-concept” stages and seem to follow a constant zapping” pattern, Indeed, most publication are preliminary (and in all appearance successful) “proof-of-concept” studies based on new techniques or data treatments. As many techniques can detect GER particles [85] or differentiate a limited amount of ink spe- cimens witha high level of confidence [84]. research focusing on the methods guarantees a positive and publishable result, if not Jn a forensic journal, then at least in chemistry or technique- based sources such as Microchemical Journal ot Journal of Raman “Spectroscopy. In fact, articles refused by a forensic science journal (ue to their ack of added value to the field) are regularly pub- lished in other flelds." This observation tends to confirm that ‘many papers linked to a forensic application may not be as re- levant to forensic practice as they should be. In this view, "This comment is based on te autor’ oles nthe eon and sewing ofp rs submited to forest jours, While oe nied to the gunset residue and {Heston eocames ope Hs tea same 3 eae Fores Scene Itermaxonal x () research does not answer practical needs, but implicit or explicit. ‘publication criteria from other disciplines such as the novelty of the technology, rather than the novelty of the data (ie. in- formation extracted from the trace |). These proof-of-concept studies also requires Less time and effort and lead to higher ‘numbers of publications (meeting the "publish or perish” implicit tule of academia (8) Specialisation and standards: Forensic science practice is often uided by specialised skills and detailed guidelines and standards that took years to be developed and implemented [12.75-77| ‘This is wel illustrated by the following citation by Charles et al [23|: “For instance, since organic CSR (OGSR) analysis i mainly related ro bulk: chemistry and since current GSR-expers are for most of them working in material anaysis departments, in our opinion only a new technique offering substantial benefit in terms of ana- ‘ytical performances wil gain the favour ofthese experts and change ‘their anatytical paradigm.” Once a highly sophisticated technique such a5 SEM-EDX has been implemented in practice, requiring specialists to operate the instrument as well as maintenance costs and standards, itis very difficult to change practice for technical, structural and financial reasons, Indeed, a specialist trained on SEM-EDX may not be able or motivated to operate another instrument such as LIBS oF LC-Mis/MS (technical issue). They also operate on a daily routine with little time for additional twaining and no easy access to other instruments (structural issue), Finally, buying a new costly instrument with associated ‘raining may not be financially viable (financial issue). From the ‘manager point of view, it is also difficult to free time and re- sources for practitioners to carry out research. When they do, the research may not meet the criteria to be published outside es- tablished networks (e.., European Network of Forensic Science Institutes,” The Chartered Society of Forensic Stience in the UK, The Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic, Science in the US" or The Australian and New Zealand Forensic Science Society)” Indeed, practice-oriented researc is not al- ‘ays considered novel enough (at least in a technical point of view) and. scientific publication requires specific formatting, language, "submission, revision and proofing that can hamper publication from scientists outside the academic feld. Ths also further the gap between research and practice. « Lack of relevance: A third explanation might be found in the fact ‘that advanced techniques do not bring much more information compared to the added costs of implementing them in routine. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that ink differentiation using an advanced and often destructive technique (eg. analy tical chemistry technique) is not the most relevant examination in practice [84], Indeed, a high number of inks can already be differentiated using straightforward optical techniques available in all forensic laboratories, In contrast, the added values of ad- ditional techniques will in mast cases only bring confirmation ‘that the ink entries cannot be differentiated. While the meaning. of a reliable differentiation is straightforward (Le. the ink entries are different in their composition), the result of a non-differ entiation is not so easily interpreted as inks are mass products Many different pens and brands share the same ink formulation, (Ge. its rarely possible to conclude that two ink entries were ‘made by the same pen). Thus, the fact that ink analysis is carried ‘out only ina small number of cases can be explained not by the © helene) ast acces: August 2022) © nsw gorjoganzation sce ars-commiteesfrensic scence (tas acess: August 222) hes wir s.r (Ls acces: August 202) % ups ants (ast acess: August 202) ° Many reevanised jaral re pie in English, while most researchers nd practitioners around the worl reno ative Ene speakerWeyermann SW, Margo ta Jack of useful analytical approaches, but by the lack of relevant additional information brought by such analysis. Indeed, no amount of new technology will allow increasing the initial relevance of the trace [1154.57.88 ‘This brings us to the relatively small percentage of articles ad- ‘dressing more fundamental forensic issues, such a a better under- standing of the trace and its information content [17 Thus, the issue may be mote of an interpretative nature than a technical one. It should be noted that we do not restrict the term "interpretative" to the use of complex statistical approaches. We are rather advocating, the necessity of case-based critical thinking to focus the research efforts where they will bing the most impact in terms of relevance and reliability). Thus, 60 years after Kirk’ call for better defined Tesearch [1], we have to acknowledge that the increase of techno- logical research has been much larger (and has gathered more ‘consensuis) than the increase of research into fundamental forensic theory and principles (11 In other words, the problem identified by kirk may even have worsened over the last 60 years. 6, Towards more relevance in research In summary, research trends seem to be mainly Focused on new instruments and technology (ie, respecting the issue of originality) ‘and easiness of producing positive results (ie, high feasibility), ¢hus following implicit requirements of apparent novelty and quantiy. Indeed, the reward and research funding systems often promote trendy short-term projects with dubious impact on forensic science (thus fostering disruption and fragmentation rather than common longer-term and effort endeavours). Despite alternative propositions [891 the academic world mainly strives on metries such as the rhumber of publications, citations, h-index"” or even number of tweets. Such requirements, linked to the digital transformation of ‘our society, led to a massive increase in scienifc publications ac- ‘entuating the current big data challenges, that are not restricted to forensic science | 18.80). At this stage, the real challenge is not to Increase the research novelty and quantity, but rather its re- Tevance and quality. ‘While many universities and funding agencies strive to promote ‘open science as a mean to improve the difusion and sharing of this massive amount of generated information (a very positive en- deavour). the questions of triage and long-term storage are not suiiciently addressed, and mainly viewed as additional technolo gical and economic issues, rather than as scientific and sustainability Challenges. Thus, relevant information remains, 100 often, a needle lost in the haystack of publications Efforts to increase quality had little impact an the present state of (forensic) science research, as standards and metrics can relatively easily be diverted from their original purpose and may sometimes ‘even hamper the imaginative minds of scientists to explore more relevant, but risky, pathways (9.90.91). While itis our opinion that researchers should carry out more impactful (even if fundamental) esearch, they are often forced by the systems to follow the pub: lishing trends and associated administrative workload (co “ensure” ‘quality ethics, copyright, credits, open acces...) As highlighted in 2 previous publication |9|: "There are many examples of research papers that may easity pass the integrity test while being of litle value to forensic scence, let alone of dubious quality” ‘Meanwhile most forensic science laboratories struggle with high, workloads, making the adoption of new technology unattractive The San FrancacaDecraton on Research Assessment (slot aces: August 2022) Mee Hinde calculated asthe maximum valve fh publications ha ave each bee ced 3 Fae times. Foren Sene Ineationl te (200) 1 because of the activation energy to be overcome even for those which lessens workloads. The drive for efficiency and the fact that, case numbers and turnabout time are the only metrics further re striets the practicality of carrying out research or adopting new approaches. While there ate exceptions. most forensic science 1a- Doratories do not have sufficient resources to manage their work- loads adequately. Iris necessary to acknowledge that the different reward system operating in research and practice do not promote synergy or cooperation, ‘Thus, we argue that science, and hence forensic scientists, should dicrate what research is needed rather than the systems, the poli- {icians or other disciplines. Our propositions ro move towards better and more impactful forensic science research are the following: = We advocate for more substance in forensic science publica- tions. A shift from less preliminary studies towards more forensic science content is needed, particularly in terms of more realistic specimens and tests. Preliminary studies caried out by students ‘may still be published more locally or included in larger colla- Dorative works (for the advancement of young researchers). However, the research effort should, atleast party, be refocused (on the main object of study of forensic science: the trace (Le. the ‘remnants of past activities) in the case context (11) rather than the means (12) = We also argue that less forensic science journals are needed, This ‘will allow our relatively small community to concentrate on in- creasing the relevance and quality ofthe published articles. Every ‘time a new forensic science source is created (often by the same publishers), a part of our community dedicates its efforts to the new source in terms of edition and peer-review, thus scattering ‘the efforts on multiple smaller and disparate sources rather than strengthening a selected number of main forensic science sources. We should also avoid assisting the creation of too spe- cialised “forensic” sources that are more attached to other dis- ciplines than t0 forensic science (e.g, chemistry, computer sciences of statistics) [92]. A path toward open and relevant science may come from entirely forensic science-driven in- itiatives, rather than profit-driven options, through the devel- ‘apment of Shared Open Access Publishing (SOAP) sources linked {o recognised international forensic networks. That said, the development of new techniques can be led in collaboration with other disciplines and published in other specialised sources, thus ensuring a strong technological basis before moving from the proof-of-concept stage (0 its potential forensic application |9|. The later should be published in for- censie sources and reviewed by forensic peers to ensure relevance. Following these suggestions may be dificult in our present academic systems, but i€ seems essential to move towards more relevance and quality (ie. to make more sense in our daily activ- ities). Young promising researchers have a long way to go before reaching semi-permanent positions in academia and the constant need to obtain funding (generally evaluated by non-forensic peers) strongly biased research topics from the start of an academic career ‘Thus, we call to well established researchers and managers in uni- versities, funding agencies, publishing houses and forensic labora- tories, 0 slow the frantic chase towards metrics (Le., quantity and apparent novelty) and start inereasing critical forensic thinking to address longer-term real life, as well as fundamental, challenges in collaborative enterprises (.3°.9).| Icis also important to remind all involved stakeholders that no amount of new technology wil allow increasing the inital relevance and quality of traces resulting from uncontrolled criminal activities [11168794], The only way to answer these challenges adequately ‘may be through the development of a forensic science culeure ‘through adequate forensic science education |4,11-14).ARTICLE IN PRESS (6 Weyermann 5 Ws, Margo ta (CRediT authorship contribution statement Céline Weyermann: Conceptualization, Data curation, Writing ~ original draft: Sheila Willias: Conceptualization, Writing ~ review & editing. Pierre Margot: Conceptualization, Writing - review & editing. Claude Roux: Conceptualization, Writing - review & editing. Acknowledgments ‘We would like to thank all our forensic science colleagues that participated to the many discussions we had on the topic of forensic Science research, We look forward co continuing those discussions and address the challenging development of a common forensic science culture, fed by relevant education and, research. Conflict of interests none. References 11] PL Kir, The ontogeny of criminals, Crim. aw Criminol.Plice Se. 54 (se 235-25 [2] Nasonaltesearn Coun, 2008, sreaghening Forensic cence nthe United States A Pat Forward Washington DC: The National Academies Press ps ‘otor 0.7225 12589 (ast aces June 2022) [3] Presidents Counc ef Adviors on Science And Tecnology, 2016, Forensic Scsence in Criminal Cours Ensuring Siete Vat a esate Conparson Methods Wasinglon, DC: (nips obamawhtehouse aries 2) ‘aimiistration/eoprosppcasdocsreprs (ast access: Jue 2022. [a] argc, commentary onthe need fra reseaeh cure he fren sc ‘ences, UCLA La Re 58 (3) (2011) 725-801 151 RIC Morgan EA Levin cr or the fate ofrensie seine: Lessons om the La the mpertance of epstemoogy for funding research and devo ment Forensic Se In yer. 1 (2010) 243-252 161 1-Maookin ra The nee fora researc in he forense scenes, TA Law Rev. 583) QOD) 725-777, (7) National insu of Forensic Science stalls New Zealand, 200. The ANZPRA NFS Research and Inovaton Roatnap 200-2025, =v anche auflorenscsclnceour- work prjectesearch-an-inovation proj ast ‘cess: June 2022, {81 S Kind, Te Scene Iveigaon of Crime, Forensic Sence Servis, Harrogate England, 1087p. 105-389, {o) Cous € Weyermann fom research nett research relevance to advance Foren scence, Foren ees, 6 (8) (2021) 292-208, Ho} Farapean Network of Forensic Science Isiues 2922) Vision othe European Foresc Scene Area 2030: Improving the Reliability and Validity of Forensic ‘Scence and Fosteng the lplementation of Emergng Technologies. ej content uploads 2021/1 /Uiston the European Foreasc ‘Scene Area 2030p, INH] Row, eal, Te Syne declaration - Revising the essence of forensic sence ‘ivough ts findamental pecipes Fores So In 332 (2022) 1182. nz} Cie $ wis. c: Weyermann, Siting foense scene fous om means wo Dose: ath forward forthe ds? Se. Jase 61 (6) (202) 673-86 NB] ECispin, ct al she (adonal alan steve paradigm wel sted forensics? WIREs Frese Sc 1( Ui e134, [14) F'Cispino, tal, Towards anoter pari for forensic scence? WIRES oyense Since nani 1481 115] PR DeForest, Reaping te essence of riminalistics, Si Justice 39 (3) (199) 196-08, 116) DS, Peto, 8, Kammrath PR De Forests Frese Slence In danger of ex tincon Si Justice 9 (2) (201) 199-203. IP Bécue. A. Hide, C Charped,Fingermars i 18th nero International Foremie Science Managers Symposium Review Papers. MAM Houck, oc 2018: Yor, ance Ins) TZupprod ute uiversaice: Fauci pousivele eve amin ?Etions Gen'as, Laan 2010, 119] Ro, 0. Rau. F Crispino, Hom frensis to forensic since Cur ses (Gam jstice 21 (1) (2012) 7-24 10) Mine a Cen pestis nt etc uso es [at € Sobre, tal, Reviewing research trends scene approach wsing {Ganser Residue (OSE erature as an example MDP ST (1) (2020) 1-17. [22] Vetedote Mite etal, Tho elvan of rsh sues ovens scence, Wik Forensic 023). [23] Chives, er a 2018, Gunshot reid, 1 ep leans Forensic Science Manages Symposium Review Papers, MM. Houck, Eto. 209: Loa, france (24) Aig, al, Ear a5 an alternative sampling ste for GSR ana lowing ‘ong cape Frese 65 (2) (224) 10421047 Fores Sen Intemationa (0) 1 [25] VR. Anand, eal, Detection of gunsho residue partes fom bare swab by llrasensive Stay Muoresceneespecorney, tm Med Taco Lap Med. 24 (3-4 (2021 85-02. [26] R Bender, eta. Discrimination of SINTOX® CSR against environmental arcs. and IS automated Investigation by SEM(EDS, Formic Chem, 24,202), [27] 80. essa, Lead tx in Laci cupin and electrochemical analysis 2 simple and low-cost aernatie fo fresi vestigation, Atal Bosal Cher. ‘a3 (2) oz 3201-3208, (26) BR ume F Nunziata, € Gentle, Gamiaton of eas gunpowsers by scanning electron micoscpylenergydeperave Xray anys ores Se (8 (2) 2001 700-718 129) Chatendoo, a, Gold nanopartile-based cascade reaction rgyred oe cogent or highly selective ithe on detection in Tres samples, Micron. 168 2031) 130] N.Cohes et al. Modeling the phenomenon of elements separation in GSR Dates Cotaning aluminum using infrmation theory als and molecule Synanics simulation, forense Chem 26 2021, [a1] MDonghi etal, On the questioned presence fflutine i inoeganic gunshot ‘esgue Case wok experience and experimental evidences, Fees S I 327 (aoa, [32] W- Feeney, tal, Detection of organi and inorganic gunshot residues fom nd conn aps a MNS ut Me 2) (2) [33] LMLDS. Ferra, etal, Gunshot residue and gunshot resiuclike material analysis using lseraiaton inductively couples plasma mass spectomery ‘maging Specteoinia Ata “Tar, At pectic 177 (2021) [34] J Foer Prees eal, The iegeaceof contaminants na shotgun are on {ho els fags (a ad bo deecting gush resides, Ca (haan 6-76. [35] SX jaa, ea, Pretiminary vation of Gunshot Residue (GSR using 3- Aennaha 3bste ase s e ms } em 2 6) [36] M. keener, AF Yimaz, The effets of gunshot residue components (9 3. Ads) on te history rats of ua secata (pea: alipaordae | Med Entomat 58 (6) 021) 2130-2177, [B71 X lu easement of gunshot resis with inductively coupled pasa mass $peciemar rom 9 nm = 25mm police revever and 752mm 25 mn PE {54 ptt Mlzoenem. 1602021 [38] Menking-Hoggat eta. Novel LIBS method for mio spatial chemical ana. ysis of inorganic puns resis, Chemem. 35 (1) 2021 [B9] K Menking Hoga e al, Development of tar made inorganic gunshot re Sidue (CSR) miroparicestandares and charactertaton with uch ‘lg spproch, Tana 225 2021, 1401 R Montoriol et a, Gunshot reside detection in stagnant water SEM-EDK ot IceMS? A pretiniary toy Frese S66) (2021 1267275 [at] Nenviat.eal, Molyodenumin Gunshot Residue experimental evidences nd ‘ection callenges nthe presence of ed and sul, Mirus. Miroaal. 27 (a) cana 666-6 121 GA Oia «a, Blochar obtained from spent come grounds: Eauation of ‘Grp properties and ts applaton ina wotammeti sensor for ead 1) fons Merten} 185 2021) [43] SPs Paton, cals "Comettalng”asacited wih gusto ensance wounds, Fares so (202, [441 FPaseying, etal. Gol et electrohemical sensors: Applications and na ostucture modifeation, Analit 146 (5) (2021 1579-1588. [45] H Rosengarten 0, catsobn 2 Pstrak, The kof ner stub contamination uring SEM/EDS anal of gunsbo elu partes, Forensic St In (2021) an. 146] H Rosengarten el, Finding SR evidence on used towels, Forensic Se I 328 (aun. 147] MSchiner, X. Weathered H, Manta, Te release of icdental nanoparticles rng te weathering of unshot reside in sas shooting ange in Ontario, Canada Can Mineral 50 (1) 2021 68-80 148) Wischweitzer ea, Forest ome visualization of gunsot residue nits [Shatoms contain rei poet marten computed tomograpy Development Gf transte uncon preset, Forensic Imaging 2 (2020) 149] Shrivastava etal, Handne device for rapid detection of lead (P24 in ‘gunshot reside for frend ppleation, Micon. 165 (2021) 150) Pshastava eta now! approach to detect bat in gunshot residue sig 2 handheld device a Toensie applation Anal. Methods 13 (8) (2021) ‘7a-a39, [BI] SA Siirnova ea, Validation of the expert methodology “detection of con- Sense trace of he shot ree cominng Remy mc compounds on ‘arlous objet by scaing electron microscopy sd Yay micounayiInd 1, Mater Daag 7 (12) (2021) 63-72, 152] 5. Stalder cal, Postmortem cigs of secondary brodiacoum posing in 2 este co tanancls), Vee Ree Case ep. 0 (8) (202) [53] A Stamout etal, survey’ of gunshot residue prevalence an the nan o ‘ivan rom sais population groups in and ousce Europe, Foreasie Chem. 23,2001, [54] 2 Sum etal, mparation-purpose review on research progress of tac evi- Genee abuts wanster regulary ane persistence, Forensic Sc Teehao 46 (5) (Guz 61a-c20 155] M Tana onus, A sure, Ast of the etc of working parameters and validation of SEMEDS method for determination a elemental camposionARTICLE IN PRESS (6 Weyermann 5 Ws, Margo ta of ommonly encountered GSR Samples in shooting eves a Kosovo Frensic S566) aor 295-2008 136] RV. Tete, et a Hinh-hroughput screening for age compounds in smoke Tes poder sing online SPE adem ass specromety, Ast] Fores Se 5) (at) 16-26. 137) ¥ upwimondus, at, A simple and rapa specrophtometric meth for nitrite detection n sal sample volumes, Cherosensos 9 (7) (2021). 138] C Vander Pv eta, Anas of primer gunshot reste paces by ser in- iced breakdown spectroscopy and laser ablation inducthely cupid plana ‘nas spectromety, Aalst 16 (1) (221) 5389-5402, 139] 1 Wongpaldes tal Simple gunshot residue anlscs for estimating fing sistance’ Investigation wit ou types of aris, Frese Sn 329 2021. [60] Za Zain, ea, eet of typeof ea ad shooting stance on patra ‘istabutlon, particle dsperson and’ amount of guasbo residue, EYE.) Forensic Sa (1) (uat) [61] ML Abe al, Spetoscopic (anata) prea © guns reside analysis fot shooting atance esumation systematic review Egypt} Presi Se 1 au [62] 0.Back Sc Soith.c Raper, Avance and lntations ia the determination and Assesment f gunshot rede nthe enaronment Eton EO, Sl 208 aoa, 169] Airey, ct al Tends in Gunshot residue detection by electrochemical ‘menos fe frese purpse J Anal Tes (3) (2021) 258-268, (64) Ju, Yaa, vibrational specuescopy apd chemi i CS: review and curren trend Eye | Forensic Sit (1) (2021) [65] G:Musie ca, Pape-tased mice devices: on-site tos for rime seme ‘tvetgtion, WAC “Teens Al Chem 13 (2021) (ss) sein, tal ist Vesons regarding the ata analysis of gunshot rescue eaes a Sty evel TTADN) Can Soe Fores St (4 (2021) 195-20, [67] shasta, VAC fan 5. Nagpal, Gunsbr residue detection techloges—a rev Fey) forensic St 1) (200) ts) ES ne eu pion ETS ee on [69] AV. Stain ecal, Environmental and health haar of mary meta polation, Enron Res 04 (200, [70] Si vshwasarma, Cabra, Perssteace detection of organic gunshot. Sidue ina Tres vestigation: a reve, Indian ores Med, Tato. 14 (Spec sue 2) (2021) 307-373. (Pt) ¥en Research progress on touch DNA on cartridge cases in forensic el, Forensic Me. 37(4) (2021) 55560. 172] EM. SS. Pasa Forensic App, SEMVEDK VOL. 2 (42) (1979) 185-182. 13] RL TayloeM. Tal a TT Noga, 1979. Fear idenucatan ty ex amination ob ragments: An SEMIEDS sty 1979. VOL. 22: p-157-174 (74) Chu Wott, RS: Nesbit. AR Calonay, Parle anlys forthe detection of gunshot reside. scanning electron mirscopylenerdy dispersive Xray har ‘Eten orhand deposits ro Ming} Forense S24 (2) (1079) 400-422, Fores Sen Intemationa (0) 1 [75] ASTM International (220) Standard Practice for Gunsot Residue Analysis by Scanning Eecwon Microscopyanery Dispersive X-Ray Specuomety. ASTM Iga, 175] ENGEL. 2022 Best Practice Manual fr the Forensic Examination of organic Gunsho: Residue by SEMEDS.ENFS-GSRIM-C, (77) este 2tb0 Standard Practice for Cunshoe Residue Anayls by Scanning Exctron Mcroscopy/Eneray Dispersive X-Ray Spectrometry. WTO. 178) 1h TerpolInensionl Forensic Scence Nabazers Symposium Review Papers N Ne Des Eo 201: Lyn, France (79) ttt lterpol Internation Forense Saence Manages Symposium Review Papers AM Houck, Eto. 2016 on, ance [80] 1th Interpol International Forensic Sence Manages Sympasum Review Papers NUM Houck, ato. 2010 [yon ae. Ist) MD. calidabin, ceyermana, Te ice st dlsehage of frearms and spent Samunition elaaens sate ofthe at and perspectives, Forest Sk In 31 Goo. [82] W. Feeney, tal, Teds in composition, colecton, persistence 2nd analy of [esi and OGSK a eve errs Forensic Chem. 19 (2020) [a3] CA, Deviere-apeye nero review of questioned documents 2016-2019, Fens So les Spey 2 (2020) 429-4, [e4] C Weyermann, KU Teenabowomnit Chapter 1: Emerging approaches inthe hays of Inks on questioned documents, In S. Hanes (6) Emerg Teenologles Tor the Analysis of Forensic Tacs, Advanced Scenes ad ‘eennoloiesfr Secu Aplications, Spang, 2018, [85] M.Calerada, Grea Analysis of questioned documents: A review, Anal (him acta 853 (205) 143-168 Ine] EGovdsmis, GP Shapes, JW, Hikes, Recent tends in onic gunshot ee ‘Se ants TEAC Tends Anal. Chem 74201) 85-57 Is71 CrWeyermans, C Howe, A dierent perspective on the forense sence cs, ovens Sl In 323 (2021) 10770 [88] C Neumann, P Margot, Consideration onthe ASTM standards 1780-04 and 14220 oe remie canine fin, | ae Se 5 (5) 200) [s9} U Frith, Fas lane to sow scence Trends Cogn. Se. 241) (2020) 1-2 [90] S Wiis Accecation "stale et ote jcke? Presentation to forensic ‘ciance sary conference noverner 207, Susie 4 (6) 201) SDS 507, [BI] UAlon, How to chose 2 good siete problem. Mo. Cll 35 (6) (2008) 6-785, [92] 8 orsher, Ltr to he etr: Chaos nthe ecko, Science (1963) 338. [93] FCoppy. ea Prong lc drugs resus ve seconds sng Tar {able NR cent an opportunity Tr frensie abortres o cope wit he {tend Loar the ceeneatation of oes eapaitis,Foense Sh In 317 (Grr ean 04s, [04] Marga, P 2007. acolyte bedrock of reas scence and its associated Serna: i Te Roedgenteratianal Handbook of Frese neigence nd minogy 207