Aidan Armstrong, Kennedy O. Doro PhD, Katrina Cristino, Agathe Ribéreau-Gayon PhD, Shari L. Forbes PhD, William T. D. Wadsworth MA, Carl-Georg Bank PhD
{"title":"家猪(Sus Scrofa domesticus)和人类遗骸在模拟地下坟墓上的 GPR 信号比较。","authors":"Aidan Armstrong, Kennedy O. Doro PhD, Katrina Cristino, Agathe Ribéreau-Gayon PhD, Shari L. Forbes PhD, William T. D. Wadsworth MA, Carl-Georg Bank PhD","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.15622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Studies assessing the use of ground-penetrating radar (GPR) for locating unmarked human graves commonly use pigs as proxies, with recent concerns about the adequacy of pigs as substitutes for humans. Also, there is little agreement on how to identify and describe GPR signals associated with graves. Hence, this project's aim is to compare GPR signals acquired over simulated clandestine graves with pig and human remains. We established human, pig, and control graves at the REST[ES] human decomposition facility in May 2022 and monitored the graves over 17 months using a 250 MHz antenna GPR system. Our results showed the presence of perturbed and V-shaped reflectors, diffraction hyperbolas, and reflectors with amplitude loss at depth between 0.6 and 0.75 m in the radargram for graves with human and pig remains. We corroborate recent studies which concluded that the use of proxies is a viable alternative to human cadavers. The observed radar signatures were classified into five key patterns, which are characteristic of similar data collected with 250 MHz above graves reported in the literature. These classes are: V-shaped dipping reflections from grave walls (class A), small hyperbolic reflections superimposed onto a near-linear reflector (class B), hyperbolic reflections from remains within the grave (class C), new high-amplitude reflection patterns (class D) and significant loss or interruption of reflections (class E). Our proposed classification can help streamline future investigations where the goal is to interpret burials within large GPR datasets and provide language to communicate these results to the broader scientific community.</p>","PeriodicalId":15743,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1556-4029.15622","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of GPR signals over simulated clandestine graves with domestic pigs (Sus Scrofa domesticus) and human remains\",\"authors\":\"Aidan Armstrong, Kennedy O. Doro PhD, Katrina Cristino, Agathe Ribéreau-Gayon PhD, Shari L. Forbes PhD, William T. D. Wadsworth MA, Carl-Georg Bank PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1556-4029.15622\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Studies assessing the use of ground-penetrating radar (GPR) for locating unmarked human graves commonly use pigs as proxies, with recent concerns about the adequacy of pigs as substitutes for humans. Also, there is little agreement on how to identify and describe GPR signals associated with graves. Hence, this project's aim is to compare GPR signals acquired over simulated clandestine graves with pig and human remains. We established human, pig, and control graves at the REST[ES] human decomposition facility in May 2022 and monitored the graves over 17 months using a 250 MHz antenna GPR system. Our results showed the presence of perturbed and V-shaped reflectors, diffraction hyperbolas, and reflectors with amplitude loss at depth between 0.6 and 0.75 m in the radargram for graves with human and pig remains. We corroborate recent studies which concluded that the use of proxies is a viable alternative to human cadavers. The observed radar signatures were classified into five key patterns, which are characteristic of similar data collected with 250 MHz above graves reported in the literature. These classes are: V-shaped dipping reflections from grave walls (class A), small hyperbolic reflections superimposed onto a near-linear reflector (class B), hyperbolic reflections from remains within the grave (class C), new high-amplitude reflection patterns (class D) and significant loss or interruption of reflections (class E). Our proposed classification can help streamline future investigations where the goal is to interpret burials within large GPR datasets and provide language to communicate these results to the broader scientific community.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15743,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of forensic sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1556-4029.15622\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of forensic sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.15622\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.15622","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of GPR signals over simulated clandestine graves with domestic pigs (Sus Scrofa domesticus) and human remains
Studies assessing the use of ground-penetrating radar (GPR) for locating unmarked human graves commonly use pigs as proxies, with recent concerns about the adequacy of pigs as substitutes for humans. Also, there is little agreement on how to identify and describe GPR signals associated with graves. Hence, this project's aim is to compare GPR signals acquired over simulated clandestine graves with pig and human remains. We established human, pig, and control graves at the REST[ES] human decomposition facility in May 2022 and monitored the graves over 17 months using a 250 MHz antenna GPR system. Our results showed the presence of perturbed and V-shaped reflectors, diffraction hyperbolas, and reflectors with amplitude loss at depth between 0.6 and 0.75 m in the radargram for graves with human and pig remains. We corroborate recent studies which concluded that the use of proxies is a viable alternative to human cadavers. The observed radar signatures were classified into five key patterns, which are characteristic of similar data collected with 250 MHz above graves reported in the literature. These classes are: V-shaped dipping reflections from grave walls (class A), small hyperbolic reflections superimposed onto a near-linear reflector (class B), hyperbolic reflections from remains within the grave (class C), new high-amplitude reflection patterns (class D) and significant loss or interruption of reflections (class E). Our proposed classification can help streamline future investigations where the goal is to interpret burials within large GPR datasets and provide language to communicate these results to the broader scientific community.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Forensic Sciences (JFS) is the official publication of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS). It is devoted to the publication of original investigations, observations, scholarly inquiries and reviews in various branches of the forensic sciences. These include anthropology, criminalistics, digital and multimedia sciences, engineering and applied sciences, pathology/biology, psychiatry and behavioral science, jurisprudence, odontology, questioned documents, and toxicology. Similar submissions dealing with forensic aspects of other sciences and the social sciences are also accepted, as are submissions dealing with scientifically sound emerging science disciplines. The content and/or views expressed in the JFS are not necessarily those of the AAFS, the JFS Editorial Board, the organizations with which authors are affiliated, or the publisher of JFS. All manuscript submissions are double-blind peer-reviewed.