ArticleScientific reports2025
Sex inference based on convolutional neural network analysis of fingerprint data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in forensic science: a systematic review. Part I: personal identification.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The analysis of fingerprint features for inferring biological sex is a growing area of research in forensic science. This study presents a lightweight and well-validated convolutional neural network (CNN) as an alternative approach for this task. A dedicated dataset of 1,000 fingerprint images was collected from 200 volunteers (100 males and 100 females). To ensure rigorous evaluation of generalisation ability, an independent test set of 100 images from an additional 20 volunteers (10 males and 10 females) was held out for final assessment. The proposed CNN, featuring a dual-convolutional-layer architecture, was optimised using a cross-entropy loss function and the Adam optimiser. It achieved a validation accuracy of 91.00% and a test accuracy of 95.00%, with AUC values of 0.974 and 0.983, respectively. Supplementary fivefold cross-validation on the development cohort yielded a mean accuracy of 90.60% (SD: 2.04%), confirming stable performance. Class activation mapping (CAM) was employed to visualise the model's focus regions, enhancing interpretability and providing insights into biometric relevance. These results demonstrate that the model compares favourably with traditional methods, suggesting its potential as an efficient and reliable complementary tool for forensic identification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.