Discrimination of Various Paper Types Using Diffuse Reflectance Ultraviolet-Visible Near-Infrared (UV-Vis-NIR) Spectroscopy: Forensic Application to Questioned Documents

Author： Kumar Raj Kumar Vinay Sharma Vishal

Publisher： Society for Applied Spectroscopy

E-ISSN： 1943-3530|69|6|714-720

ISSN： 0003-7028

Source： Applied Spectroscopy, Vol.69, Iss.6, 2015-06, pp. : 714-720

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

Diffuse reflectance ultraviolet-visible-near-infrared (UV-Vis-NIR) spectroscopy is applied as a means of differentiating various types of writing, office, and photocopy papers (collected from stationery shops in India) on the basis of reflectance and absorbance spectra that otherwise seem to be almost alike in different illumination conditions. In order to minimize bias, spectra from both sides of paper were obtained. In addition, three spectra from three different locations (from one side) were recorded covering the upper, middle, and bottom portions of the paper sample, and the mean average reflectivity of both the sides was calculated. A significant difference was observed in mean average reflectivity of Side A and Side B of the paper using Student's pair >t-test. Three different approaches were used for discrimination: (1) qualitative features of the whole set of samples, (2) principal component analysis, and (3) a combination of both approaches. On the basis of the first approach, i.e., qualitative features, 96.49% discriminating power (DP) was observed, which shows highly significant results with the UV-Vis-NIR technique. In the second approach the discriminating power is further enhanced by incorporating the principal component analysis (PCA) statistical method, where this method describes each UV-Vis spectrum in a group through numerical loading values connected to the first few principal components. All components described 100% variance of the samples, but only the first three PCs are good enough to explain the variance (PC1 = 51.64%, PC2 = 47.52%, and PC3 = 0.54%) of the samples; i.e., the first three PCs described 99.70% of the data, whereas in the third approach, the four samples, C, G, K, and N, out of a total 19 samples, which were not differentiated using qualitative features (approach no. 1), were therefore subjected to PCA. The first two PCs described 99.37% of the spectral features. The discrimination was achieved by using a loading plot between PC1 and PC2. It is therefore concluded that maximum discrimination of writing, office, and photocopy paper could be achieved on the basis of the second approach. Hence, the present inexpensive analytical method can be appropriate for application to routine questioned document examination work in forensic laboratories because it provides nondestructive, quantitative, reliable, and repeatable results.