A new company called "V" is promoting what it calls "Layered Voice Analysis" (LVA), a technology that the company's brochure describes as a "Major Investigative Focus Tool designed for professionals in law enforcement, homeland security, armed forces and intelligence and crossed applications in health care industries":

http://www.vworldwide.com/index.html

Note that this limited liability company formerly used the domain name simplyv.org.

See NBC tech reporter I.J. Hudson's recent uncritical reporting on V:

http://www.nbc4.com/technology/2324847/detail.html

It seems that V's reason for being is to find a U.S. market for the "Layered Voice Analysis" software produced by Israel-based Nemesysco Ltd., whose software also was used in the Truster and Truster Pro lie detection software formerly marketed by Trustech Ltd.

Let the buyer beware.

"V" has caught the attention of the Washington Post, too. See "Software Searches for Truth in Voice Changes" by Ellen McCarthy, 14 July 2003, p. E05.

I received an e-mail message from Dr. Richard D. Parton, V's CEO, who explains that the .org domain was chosen because the .com domain was already taken, and he thought as a start-up, the company's time and attention would be better spent elsewhere than picking domains. Dr. Parton wrote that he wouldn't mind answering any questions I might have, adding that the public benefits from informed debate. The e-mail reply I sent bounced back with an error message that his address no longer exists or no longer accepts mail, so I'm posting my reply here.

Dear Dr. Parton,

Thank you for your reply. I agree with you that the public benefits from informed debate. In my e-mail reply to you, I suggested that we carry out this debate here on the AntiPolygraph.org message board.

Your company has made some extraordinary claims about the capabilities of Layered Voice Analysis. Could you direct me to any double-blind studies that support these claims?

Whenever you decide that a particular technology is not to your liking, no amount of persuasion or research is going to change the way you view things. I have been working with the LVA technology for some time, and I can tell you that in very simple terms; it works. I know that you do not wish to hear this kind of stuff. I also realize that you would prefer to to have me malign the technology as possible because that is your venue. That, too, is okay. As long as we understand one another. Your job is to totally discredit any technology regardless of its utility. Yes, there are blind studies with LVA, CVSA, Polygraph, etc. I just do not think that any of these studies would be of interest to you since your raison d'etre is "bashing" of all deception detection technologies regardless of their validity.

Dr. Albert  de Vries

So nice of the good 'doctor' to come down from his mountain and tell everyone his little gizmo 'works'.   

Dr. de Vries,

You write:

Quote:


The only person regarding whom you can really know whether the above characterization is true is yourself...

Quote:


What evidence led you to the conclusion that it "works?"

Quote:


I actually would like to hear the evidence. Dr. Parton has acknowledged in an e-mail to me that there are no double-blind studies of LVA.  Several of Robert L. Parks's "Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science" are evident in the way LVA is being marketed. Thus, I think you should be able to appreciate why I and others might be skeptical of V's claims regarding Layered Voice Analysis (LVA). Extraodinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

V's key claim regarding LVA that I find to be extraordinary is the claim that LVA can detect deception with an accuracy rate over 90%. Where is the proof? The U.S. National Academy of Sciences states in its report, The Polygraph and Lie Detection, "Although proponents of voice stress analysis claim high levels of accuracy, empirical research on the validity of the technique has been far from encouraging."

V's website states (on the "How it Works" page), "In the late 1990's that all changed with the advent of Layered Voice Analysis. Voice analysis was enhanced by the rapid advancements in personal computer technology. New research was commissioned. When mated with digital sound technology, the results were astounding. Not only were accuracy standards raised above 90% level, but other unexpected results emerged." Where can I find a copy of any report(s) on the research that was commissioned?

The same page on the V website also asserts that, "Mapping the DNA of thought and emotion is now being achieved." Could you refer me to any published research on this purported mapping?

Quote:


No, Dr. de Vries. It is not our job to discredit any technology. If those claiming LVA can detect deception with an accuracy rate of >90% wish to be believed, then it is their job to prove such claims.

Quote:


Again, Dr. Parton wrote to me that there are no double-blind studies of LVA. Perhaps he is mistaken. Would you please provide citations for the "blind studies with LVA..." to which you refer? Have any such studies been published in refereed scientific journals?

Saidme wrote on Aug 1^st, 2003 at 1:57pm:


What does it say for you when even Saidme thinks your little 'lie detector' is no more useful than a snoopy snowcone machine? 

Now we're cooking.  Let's not leave anyone out when it comes to credibility.  Attack us all.  True_dat is going to have to go back to George's basher school.  He/she's a little slow on the up-take.  You should know better than to give any hint of a compliment to a polygraph examiner.