The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
group of 10 pairs (labeled 1–10) to the second (labeled A–K; an 11th pair with a different number of land impressions was inserted in this group). Roberge and Beauchamp (2006) exploited the pairwise nature of the test samples to create a training set of known matches; this gave them a sense of optimal “Max Phase” scores (see Chapter 4) to use as a decision rule and assign matches. Following the training phase, the testing was performed stage-wise—performing a set of comparisons, applying decision rules to pick out matches, removing those elements from the dataset, and repeating—until all assignments were made.
Though a caption in Dillon (2005:10) touted BulletTRAX-3D (and its companion MatchPoint Plus display stations) as “the latest configuration of IBIS”—suggesting a replacement of IBIS—the system was originally positioned as a counterpart to IBIS. However, FTI has recently indicated a shift of its product line to focus on three-dimensional platforms, shifting the two-dimensional system currently deployed as the base for the NIBIN-system as the “IBIS Heritage” branch (see Box 4-1). Promotional materials for the three-dimensional systems emphasize that the three-dimensional systems are backward-compatible with the older two-dimensional systems; photographs are taken during the two-dimensional acquisition process and are offered as a layer that can be viewed onscreen in the three-dimensional system, so that photographs can presumably be subjected to the existing two-dimensional comparison process. It is unknown what changes have been made to account for three-dimensional measurement information in generating comparison scores in these new systems.