The standard that represents a legal precedent regarding the admissibility of scientific examinations or experiments in legal cases is: B. Daubert The Daubert standard, established by the Supreme Court in the case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993), sets the criteria for the admissibility of expert testimony in federal court. It focuses on whether the scientific evidence is based on reliable principles and methods that have been properly applied to the facts of the case.

The standard that represents a legal precedent regarding the admissibility of scientific examinations or experiments in legal cases is: B. Daubert sorry i was wrong Frye is wrong

Here's a brief overview of the other options: SWGDE & SWGIT: Refers to organizations that develop guidelines and best practices for forensic disciplines but are not standards for admissibility. Frye: The Frye standard, established by Frye v. United States (1923), was an earlier standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence, which has been largely superseded by Daubert in federal cases. IOCE: Refers to the International Organization on Computer Evidence, which provides guidelines and best practices but does not set legal standards for admissibility.

The 'Frye Standard', in psychology and legal context, refers to a test used in courts to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence. It states that scientific evidence is admissible if the methodology or principles upon which it is based are generally accepted by the scientific community.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/frye_standard#:~:text=Frye%20Standard%20is%20used%20to,1923).

the "Frye standard" is not mentioned as a reference to the material present in the book. All things related to expert witnesses, including its definition, do not mention Frye whatsoever.