Abegg Claudine, Balbo Ilaria, Dominguez Alejandro, Grabherr Silke, Campana Lorenzo, Moghaddam Negahnaz
Unit of Forensic Imaging and Anthropology, University Center of Legal Medicine Lausanne-Geneva, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Dipartimento di Scienze biologiche, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Forensic Sci Res. 2020 Oct 30;6(1):34-41. doi: 10.1080/20961790.2020.1817270.
Virtual anthropology (VA) is based on applying anthropological methods currently used to analyse bones to 3D models of human remains. While great advances have been made in this endeavour in the past decade, several interrogations concerning how reliable these models are and what their proper use should be remain unanswered. In this research, a fundamental assumption of VA has been investigated: if the way we perceive and apply an anthropological method is truly similar when looking at bones macroscopically and through various 3D media. In order to answer, 10 skulls of known age and sex were scanned using a computed tomography (CT) scanner and a 3D surface scanner. Two observers separately applied a defined staging method to eight suture sites on these skulls, first looking at the bone macroscopically, then at the 3D surface scan, and finally on the CT scan. Two rounds of observation were carried out by each observer. Intra- and inter-observer error were evaluated, and two sample -tests used to evaluate if the different types of medium used yielded significantly different observations. The results show a high degree of inter-observer error, and that data obtained from 3D surface scans differ from macroscopic observation (confidence level 95%, ≤ 0.05). CT scans, in these settings, yielded results comparable to those obtained through macroscopic observations. These results offer many possibilities for future research, including indications on the kind of anthropological methods and anatomical landmarks that might be reliably transferable to the virtual environment. All current methods used in traditional anthropology should be tested, and if they prove unreliable, new techniques to analyse bones from virtual models should be developed.Key pointsLarge discrepancies between observation on dry bones and computer-generated 3D models (surface scans or CT scans) could lead to the re-evaluation of the suitability of traditional anthropological methods for application on 3D models.This preliminary study evaluates whether macroscopic, 3D surface scans, and CT scans viewings generate different observations.The results indicate that the data are not always coherent across all three media of observation.Explanations include the aspect given to the bone by the 3D software, differences between handling bones in real life on a computer, and level of expertise of the observers.
虚拟人类学(VA)基于将目前用于分析骨骼的人类学方法应用于人类遗骸的三维模型。尽管在过去十年中这一努力取得了巨大进展,但关于这些模型的可靠性以及其正确用途的几个问题仍未得到解答。在这项研究中,对虚拟人类学的一个基本假设进行了调查:当我们宏观观察骨骼以及通过各种三维媒介观察时,我们感知和应用人类学方法的方式是否真的相似。为了回答这个问题,使用计算机断层扫描(CT)扫描仪和三维表面扫描仪对10个已知年龄和性别的头骨进行了扫描。两名观察者分别对这些头骨上的八个缝合部位应用一种定义好的分期方法,首先宏观观察骨骼,然后观察三维表面扫描图像,最后观察CT扫描图像。每位观察者进行了两轮观察。评估了观察者内部和观察者之间的误差,并使用两个样本检验来评估所使用的不同类型媒介是否产生了显著不同的观察结果。结果显示观察者之间存在高度误差,并且从三维表面扫描获得的数据与宏观观察结果不同(置信水平95%,≤0.05)。在这些情况下,CT扫描产生的结果与通过宏观观察获得的结果相当。这些结果为未来的研究提供了许多可能性,包括关于哪些人类学方法和解剖标志可能可靠地转移到虚拟环境的指示。应该对传统人类学中使用的所有当前方法进行测试,如果它们被证明不可靠,就应该开发从虚拟模型分析骨骼的新技术。
要点
干骨观察与计算机生成的三维模型(表面扫描或CT扫描)之间的巨大差异可能导致重新评估传统人类学方法应用于三维模型的适用性。
这项初步研究评估了宏观观察、三维表面扫描和CT扫描观察是否会产生不同的结果。
结果表明,在所有三种观察媒介中数据并不总是一致的。
解释包括三维软件赋予骨骼的外观、在现实生活中与在计算机上处理骨骼的差异以及观察者的专业水平。