DNA evidence and the prosecutor's fallacy: a maths EPQ idea
A title to start from
How should a court interpret the chance of a DNA match, and how has probability been misused in trials?
Why it works as an EPQ
Conditional probability errors in court are well documented, and the mathematics is exactly the A Level kind.
Scope and difficulty
Solid. Solid. Two or three well-documented cases from reliable sources.
The maths
Builds on these A Level topics: Probability.
You would learn:
- Bayes' theorem
- The prosecutor's fallacy
- Independence assumptions
One possible plan
- Explain match probabilities and what they assume.
- Show the prosecutor's fallacy with numbers.
- Analyse documented cases using reliable published accounts.
- Recommend how evidence should be presented.
Pitfalls
- Treating independence as automatic.
- Speculating about real people beyond the published record.
Where to start reading
- Search for: prosecutor's fallacy Royal Statistical Society
- Search for: Sally Clark case statistics
Similar ideas
- Models of tumour growthWhich growth model best describes tumour growth: exponential, logistic or Gompertz?
- Why giants cannot existWhy can't giants exist? Scaling laws in biology from ants to elephants
- Modelling an epidemicHow well does a simple SIR model capture the spread of an epidemic, and what does it imply for vaccination?
- When a positive test is probably wrongWhy can a positive result from an accurate medical test still be more likely wrong than right?
All maths in biology and medicine ideas · all 93 ideas
Your EPQ must be your own work. These pages coach: ideas, structure, checklists and planning. Submitting text, proofs, code or analysis written by someone else or by an AI tool as your own is malpractice. How to use help and AI honestly.