Search

JN-25 was the primary World War II Japanese naval cipher. It was introduced in 1939 and evolved throughout the war, presenting US Navy codebreakers with a succession of challenges. When JN-25N-62 was introduced on 25 July 1944, one question that arose for US Navy codebreakers was the function of two digits in the starting point indicator: did they represent a pair of single-digit numbers or a single two-digit number? US Navy codebreakers knew Japanese cipher clerks often chose an additive in the leftmost column of a page of additives as the starting point for the string of text additives. This lack of randomness enabled an attack on the indicator. Navy codebreakers used a statistical test to decide between the two possibilities. Construction of the necessary probability tables was assigned to Temple Rice Hollcroft, a mathematician on the faculty of Wells College. Hollcroft's problem is documented in an internal Navy history, but that history raises almost as many questions as it answers. This article explores the construction of Hollcroft's tables, how they were used, and why Hollcroft was selected to construct the tables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We review historically the position of Sir R.A. Fisher towards Bayesian inference and, particularly, the classical Bayes–Laplace paradigm. We focus on his Fiducial Argument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

By now, a great deal is known about the contributions of Alan Turing, I. J. Good, Max Newman, and other mathematicians who worked at Bletchley Park during World War II. But what about the other side? Until recently, very little was known about the German mathematicians who aided the Nazi war effort: who were they, where did they work, and what did they do? But now, thanks to the release of a large number of TICOM documents in recent years, an initial picture is beginning to emerge. In this article, we identify the most important mathematicians who worked in the different German cryptologic organizations during the war: who they were, how they were recruited, which organizations they were in, and what they did (when this is known). Although their successes never rivaled those of Bletchley Park, they did have successes, and these were sometimes due to the efforts of mathematicians who went on to have distinguished careers after the war. One question that motivated this study was to understand the reasons for the German communications security meltdown during the war: how they got the Enigma and Tunny security assessments partly right but mostly wrong. As will be seen, this was not due to a lack of talent: some of the very best German mathematicians contributed to their war effort. The answer lies instead in how these potentially very useful assets were actually used (in striking contrast with what happened at Bletchley Park). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reports on the life and work of Alan Turing that was presented in this book. Discusses the time in which Alan Turing conducted his work in attempting to crack the enigma code. Perceptions and options of Turing work changed after the publication of this book. Since 1983 a tsunami of information has become available about almost every aspect of the operations of Bletchley Park and its parent organization GCCS (the predecessor of GCHQ, the present-day U.K. signals intelligence and information security organization). This includes the release of the 500+ page ?General Report on Tunny? in 2000 (?Tunny? was the code name for an important online German teleprinter encryption device), as well as wartime manuals and technical papers of Turing, Alexander, and others, other archival materials, and memoirs of many people who worked in the different units at Bletchley. The book under review is a reissue of Hodges?s original 1983 biography. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

4 Reference: Gill P, Bleka Ø, Hansson O, Benschop C, Haned H. Forensic practitioner's guide to the interpretation of complex DNA profiles. Reference: Gill P, Bleka Ø, Hansson O, Benschop C, Haned H. Forensic practitioner's guide to the interpretation of complex DNA profiles. I SmartRank i is an I LRmix i -based software system developed to search large DNA databases; I CaseSolver i is an expert system using an R-based graphical interface permitting the rapid comparison of DNA profiles; I DNAmatch2 i is an alternative for contamination searches. [Extracted from the article]

In April 2012, two papers written by Alan Turing during the Second World War on the use of probability in cryptanalysis were released by GCHQ. The longer of these presented an overall framework for the use of Bayes's theorem and prior probabilities, including four examples worked out in detail: the Vigenère cipher, a letter subtractor cipher, the use of repeats to find depths, and simple columnar transposition. (The other paper was an alternative version of the section on repeats.) Turing stressed the importance in practical cryptanalysis of sometimes using only part of the evidence or making simplifying assumptions and presents in each case computational shortcuts to make burdensome calculations manageable. The four examples increase roughly in their difficulty and cryptanalytic demands. After the war, Turing's approach to statistical inference was championed by his assistant in Hut 8, Jack Good, which played a role in the later resurgence of Bayesian statistics. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Abstract: The article “Problem of two races,” which appeared in 1934 in French and Russian in the Matematichesky Sbornik (Moscow), authored by the noted applied mathematician and statistician Richard von Mises (1883–1953), is interpreted as having a twofold agenda. On its surface it is merely a detailed mathematical analysis of the statistical problem of comparing the distributions of a quantitative characteristic in two different classes. But on closer examination it serves two auxiliary purposes. On the one hand, von Mises, who as a Jew fled Nazi Germany in 1933, satirically attacked Nazi racial doctrines by resorting to statistical parody. On the other hand, von Mises employed his theoretical results to further his own distinctive program of objective Bayesian statistics. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Several forensic sciences, especially of the pattern-matching kind, are increasingly seen to lack the scientific foundation needed to justify continuing admission as trial evidence. Indeed, several have been abolished in the recent past. A likely next candidate for elimination is bitemark identification. A number of DNA exonerations have occurred in recent years for individuals convicted based on erroneous bitemark identifications. Intense scientific and legal scrutiny has resulted. An important National Academies review found little scientific support for the field. The Texas Forensic Science Commission recently recommended a moratorium on the admission of bitemark expert testimony. The California Supreme Court has a case before it that could start a national dismantling of forensic odontology. This article describes the (legal) basis for the rise of bitemark identification and the (scientific) basis for its impending fall. The article explains the general logic of forensic identification, the claims of bitemark identification, and reviews relevant empirical research on bitemark identification-highlighting both the lack of research and the lack of support provided by what research does exist. The rise and possible fall of bitemark identification evidence has broader implications-highlighting the weak scientific culture of forensic science and the law's difficulty in evaluating and responding to unreliable and unscientific evidence.