首页> 外文期刊>Anthropologischer Anzeiger >'What and how should we share?' An inter-method inter-observer comparison of measurement error with landmark-based craniometric datasets
【24h】

'What and how should we share?' An inter-method inter-observer comparison of measurement error with landmark-based craniometric datasets

机译:“我们应该分享什么,怎么样?” 基于地标的颅骨数据集的测量误差的帧间观察者间的观察者间

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The present study evaluates the precision and accuracy of photogrammetric 3D modeling of human crania in landmark acquisition and explores the limitations of combining datasets acquired by different observers and different measurement methods. Our working sample comprises 50 adult human crania, which were modeled with 3D photogrammetry. 3D coordinates of 56 landmarks were collected from the 3D models with Meshlab software and an existing corresponding dataset digitized with Microscribe-3DX has been utilized. Measurement error for landmark configurations and Inter Landmarks Distances (ILDs) for each type of landmarks has been assessed through least root mean squared deviation and mean absolute error respectively. Inter-observer error has been assessed on a sub-sample of 20 crania, which was also used for caliper measured ILDs. Between-methods Technical Error Measurement (TEM) based on ILDs has been calculated for evaluating the interchangeability for different datasets. Photogrammetric 3D models and Microscribe-3DX share identical rated accuracy regarding craniometric applications and both methods show increased accuracy in locating type I landmarks as opposed to types II and III. However, photogrammetric 3D models perform better in terms of inter-observer error suggesting higher reliability of measurements. Furthermore, ILDs are less prone to measurement error than landmark configurations. Finally, ILDs exhibit similar relative TEM of about 1.5% between Microscribe, caliper and 3D model based measurement methods. Combining datasets of landmark coordinates acquired from photogrammetric 3D models does not compromise the statistical integrity in terms of measurement error, which also applies to pooling ILD datasets from multiple methods. Nevertheless, compiling 3D datasets from multiple methods for 3DGM analysis should be done cautiously.
机译:本研究评估了人类Crania在地标采集中摄影测量3D建模的精度和准确性,探索了不同观察者和不同测量方法所获得的组合数据集的局限性。我们的工作样本包含50名成人人Crania,它用3D摄影测量进行了建模。从Meshlab软件的3D模型中收集了56个地标的3D坐标,并利用了使用MicroScripe-3DX数字化的现有相应数据集。通过最小根均方平方偏差和平均绝对误差分别评估了每个类型地标的地标配置的测量误差和每个类型的地标的距离(ILD)。在20名Crania的子样本中评估了观察者差异错误,其也用于卡尺测量的ILD。方法之间的技术误差测量基于ILD的测量(TEM)已经计算用于评估不同数据集的互换性。摄影图表3D模型和MicroScript-3dx共享了关于渐进量应用的相同额定准确性,并且两种方法都显示出在II型和III型和III型相反的定位I型地标时提高了准确性。然而,摄影测量3D模型在观察者间错误方面表现更好,表明测量的可靠性更高。此外,ILDS比地标配置不太容易发生测量误差。最后,ILDS在微标,卡钳和3D模型的测量方法之间表现出相似的相对TEM约为1.5%。从摄影测量3D模型获取的地标坐标的组合数据集不会损害测量误差方面的统计完整性,这也适用于来自多种方法的池数据集。然而,应谨慎地编制来自多种3DGM分析方法的3D数据集。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号