31-05-2013, 01:40 PM
Valuable and interesting reply Andrew,
Good to know that opening moves were discounted from the analysis of Ivanov's chess games.
Would dispute one thing though in your analysis.
If there are enough profiles stored in a DNA database then odds of millions to one against a match of one of them with crime scene DNA is not surprising and if that is the only evidence then its not strong enough on its own - I am sure it won't be long before databases with millions of DNA profiles exist.
One thing I'm not sure about perhaps you can help?
In the lottery analogy if there are 14,000,000 possible combinations and 140,000,000 lucky dips were sold then typically one would expect around 10 winners.
For DNA tests are all possible combinations equally well populated? This does seem to be a hidden assumption in the stats.
Good to know that opening moves were discounted from the analysis of Ivanov's chess games.
Would dispute one thing though in your analysis.
If there are enough profiles stored in a DNA database then odds of millions to one against a match of one of them with crime scene DNA is not surprising and if that is the only evidence then its not strong enough on its own - I am sure it won't be long before databases with millions of DNA profiles exist.
One thing I'm not sure about perhaps you can help?
In the lottery analogy if there are 14,000,000 possible combinations and 140,000,000 lucky dips were sold then typically one would expect around 10 winners.
For DNA tests are all possible combinations equally well populated? This does seem to be a hidden assumption in the stats.