Suppr超能文献

关于FARO Scene和FARO Zone 3D在起源区域分析方面的比较研究。

A comparative study between FARO Scene and FARO Zone 3D for area of origin analysis.

作者信息

Le Quan, Liscio Eugene

机构信息

ai2-3D, 271 Jevlan Drive, Woodbridge, ON, L4L 8A4, Canada.

ai2-3D, 271 Jevlan Drive, Woodbridge, ON, L4L 8A4, Canada; University of Toronto Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Road, Mississauga, ON, L5L 1C6, Canada.

出版信息

Forensic Sci Int. 2019 Aug;301:166-173. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.05.031. Epub 2019 May 19.

Abstract

This comparative study aimed to investigate the differences between the workflow, accuracy, and reproducibility of the area of origin tools in FARO Scene and FARO Zone 3D software. Released in 2018, FZ3D has recently been introduced as an alternative application to FARO Scene's Forensic Wizard plug-in for bloodstain pattern analysis but no accuracy studies have been published at the time of this study. A total of 15 impacts were created using an impact rig at three different positions from two orthogonal walls (50cm, 75cm, 100cm). One researcher conducted the analyses with both software packages, and the total errors using FZ3D were not statistically greater than using FARO Scene (p>0.05). With FZ3D, 50% of the total errors ranged from 6.63cm to 15.68cm with a minimum of 2.45cm, maximum of 27cm, and median of 11.22cm. With FARO Scene, 50% of the total errors ranged from 3.6cm to 15.5cm with a minimum of 2.93cm, maximum of 31.25cm and median of 9.6cm. A blind test with seven participants analyzing the same 15 impacts in FZ3D resulted in 100 out of 105 total errors (95%) to be within the accepted error range of 20cm. Of the five total errors outside 20cm, one was obtained from the 75cm position and four from the 100cm position. 75% of the total errors were below 9.43cm from the 50cm position, 14.88cm from the 75cm position, and 17.39cm from the 100cm position. This could indicate that there is a positive correlation between the distance of the impact from the surfaces and total errors obtained. Based on results of previous literature and comparison to FARO Scene software, FZ3D is shown to have acceptable area of origin analysis tools.

摘要

这项对比研究旨在调查法如(FARO)Scene软件和法如Zone 3D(FZ3D)软件中血迹来源分析工具在工作流程、准确性和可重复性方面的差异。FZ3D于2018年发布,最近作为法如Scene软件中用于血迹形态分析的法医向导插件的替代应用程序被引入,但在本研究开展时,尚未有关于其准确性的研究发表。使用冲击装置在距两面正交墙壁三个不同位置(50厘米、75厘米、100厘米)制造了总共15次冲击。一名研究人员使用这两个软件包进行了分析,使用FZ3D的总误差在统计学上并不大于使用法如Scene软件的情况(p>0.05)。使用FZ3D时,总误差的50%范围为6.63厘米至15.68厘米,最小值为2.45厘米,最大值为27厘米,中位数为11.22厘米。使用法如Scene软件时,总误差的50%范围为3.6厘米至15.5厘米,最小值为2.93厘米,最大值为31.25厘米,中位数为9.6厘米。一项由七名参与者对FZ3D中相同的15次冲击进行分析的盲测结果显示,105次总误差中有100次(95%)在20厘米的可接受误差范围内。在超出20厘米的五次总误差中,一次来自75厘米位置,四次来自100厘米位置。来自50厘米位置的总误差的75%低于9.43厘米,来自75厘米位置的低于14.88厘米,来自100厘米位置的低于17.39厘米。这可能表明冲击点与表面的距离和所获得的总误差之间存在正相关。基于先前文献的结果以及与法如Scene软件的比较,FZ3D显示出具有可接受的血迹来源分析工具。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验