Landmark Location on 3D Models of Yacchi Crania
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2015 VALIDITY OF LANDMARK SELECTION GIVEN DIFFERENT 3D SCAN PROCESSING PARAMETERS: LANDMARK LOCATION ON 3D MODELS OF YACCHI CRANIA Mary-Margaret Murphy University of Montana - Missoula Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Part of the Anthropology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Murphy, Mary-Margaret, "VALIDITY OF LANDMARK SELECTION GIVEN DIFFERENT 3D SCAN PROCESSING PARAMETERS: LANDMARK LOCATION ON 3D MODELS OF YACCHI CRANIA" (2015). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 4565. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/4565 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VALIDITY OF LANDMARK SELECTION GIVEN DIFFERENT 3D SCAN PROCESSING PARAMETERS: LANDMARK LOCATION ON 3D MODELS OF YACCHI CRANIA. By MARY-MARGARET MURPHY Bachelor of Arts, The University of Montana, Missoula, Missoula 2010 Thesis presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Anthropology The University of Montana Missoula, MT December 2015 Approved by: Sandy Ross, Dean of The Graduate School Graduate School Dr. Anna M. Prentiss, Chair Department of Anthropology Dr. Randall R. Skelton Department of Anthropology Dr. Bret W. Tobalske Department of Biological Sciences © COPYRIGHT by Mary-Margaret Murphy 2015 All Rights Reserved ii Murphy, Mary-Margaret, M.A., Fall 2015 Anthropology Validity of landmark selection given different 3D scan processing parameters: landmark location on 3D models of Yacchi crania. Chairperson: Dr. Anna M. Prentiss This project tests the validity of the use of models generated with 3-D technology for the purposes of advancing craniometric methods in anthropology. The literature describing this technology as it is being incorporated and applied is focused on the classification of crania within population structure and evolutionary development. 3-D modeling methods create data that are static over time - as long as the collection and processing has a statistically insignificant impact on deviation from the original "true" sample. This thesis is interested in the questions of data collection given variations between processing and metadata of 3-D models and uses data from crania recovered from cave burials discovered on Kume Island, Okinawa Japan. The collection has been captured in surface scans and by 3-D coordinate digitizer at different times by different researchers. Adapting 3-D scanning and 3-D medical imaging technology into anthropology is highly advantageous in terms of the quality and quantity of data that can be collected and shared. Models generated from surface imaging are an excellent tool for research that serves to transmit the information encoded in the skull. Recent surface imaging technology is very user friendly from a novice perspective. However, there are different capture and processing specifications between equipment and software, which have the potential to create error due to variation caused by the data capture processes. A review of recent research working to capitalize on 3-D models belies the variation in standards of imaging and model processing. These projects tend to be preferential to data that are collected from samples with a low error rate. Error could be due to deviation of symmetry or damage. However, recovered human crania in historic and archaeological contexts are unlikely to have low rates of damage. In spite of the potential variations introduced by the applications of process parameters, there was no convincing degree of non-correspondence in correlation tests to two comparison approaches. The ultimate goal is to develop guidelines for data collection and processing that are capable of capitalizing 3-D data from any of the available technologies and processing output that is computationally efficient as well as statistically correspondent. iii 1 Acknowledgments A great measure of gratitude is due my thesis committee. Their patience and encouragement has made it possible for me to see this thesis through. After facing many practical and personal challenges, their guidance has served to keep me moving in a forward direction. Dr. Anna Prentiss accepted the challenge of steering my thesis work and committee, giving me the grounding and support I needed. Dr. Randall Skelton gave me some of the most incisive editing suggestions and thoughtful considerations for the development of the thesis study. Dr. Bret Tobalske has generously made time to join this committee and consider the research which is both inclusive and exclusive of his own body of study. Deserving of my ongoing gratitude is Professor Noriko Seguchi, my first graduate advisor, without whom, I would have not had access to the sample data from which my research is based. With her continued support, access to materials, and returns to the University of Montana - this thesis was not only made possible, but has opened many new avenues of future research. Professor Tom Foor has been an advisor and excellent supporter since I first developed a fixation on anthropological statistics under his teachings. I am thankful for all his consultations and that he has always made time for my questions. As a researcher, I must also thank those whose work and willingness to discuss and share with me have been key to rounding out my understanding of important concepts and research avenues beyond the realm of Anthropology. Dr. Shriram Hegde reached out around the world to offer suggested sources to explain complex concepts of matrix math and 3D rendering for this audience. Dr. Piotr Szymor made publications available from far outside the field which none the less resounded as they are trying to solve many of the same questions of technology integration for living subjects. My family has stood by me during this long process and perfected baffled smiles while I often wax poetic about three dimensional visualization technology, the number of times I crashed the software so integral to my work, and brag about an inscrutable spreadsheet of raw data output. I am aware it has not been easy to bear witness to the struggles and I am grateful for the buoyancy that they always found for me when I thought I might be overwhelmed by the pursuit of this graduate degree. 1 Table of Contents Table of Contents ........................................................................................... 2 List of Figures ................................................................................................ 5 List of Tables ................................................................................................. 6 List of Equations ............................................................................................ 7 Chapter One .................................................................................................. 8 Chapter Outlines ......................................................................................... 8 Introduction ............................................................................................. 11 Scanned data, technology and processing resolution and history within Medical Sciences and Biological Anthropology ........................................................ 14 Benefits of this project ............................................................................ 17 Chapter Two ................................................................................................ 20 Background .............................................................................................. 20 Chapter Three ............................................................................................. 35 Materials and methods ............................................................................... 35 Materials .................................................................................................. 35 Description of the sample ........................................................................ 35 Methods ................................................................................................... 38 Model Processing .................................................................................... 41 Landmark Sample .................................................................................. 53 Landmark Data Format ........................................................................... 59 Missing data .......................................................................................... 66 2 Statistical Analysis .................................................................................. 66 Validity testing ....................................................................................... 69 Chapter Four ............................................................................................... 72 Results .................................................................................................... 72 Landmark Sample .................................................................................... 1 Correlation analysis .................................................................................