Reasoning about evidence using Bayesian networks

10Citations
Citations of this article
35Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This paper presents methods for analyzing the topology of a Bayesian belief network created to qualify and quantify the strengths of investigative hypotheses and their supporting digital evidence. The methods, which enable investigators to systematically establish, demonstrate and challenge a Bayesian belief network, help provide a powerful framework for reasoning about digital evidence. The methods are applied to review a Bayesian belief network constructed for a criminal case involving BitTorrent file sharing, and explain the causal effects underlying the legal arguments. © 2012 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing.

References Powered by Scopus

Reasoning about evidence using Bayesian networks

38Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Probabilistic abductive computation of evidence collection strategies in crime investigation

19Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Two models of digital forensic examination

16Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Automated event and social network extraction from digital evidence sources with ontological mapping

39Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Airline catering supply chain performance during pandemic disruption: a Bayesian network modelling approach

16Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Private Renting vs. Mortgage Home Buying: Case of British Housing Market—A Bayesian Network and Directed Acyclic Graphs Approach

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tse, H., Chow, K. P., & Kwan, M. (2012). Reasoning about evidence using Bayesian networks. In IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology (Vol. 383 AICT, pp. 99–113). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33962-2_7

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 12

52%

Researcher 8

35%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

9%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

4%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Computer Science 14

70%

Social Sciences 2

10%

Engineering 2

10%

Medicine and Dentistry 2

10%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free