Rapid automated landmarking for morphometric analysis of three‐dimensional facial scans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automated phenotyping is essential for the creation of large, highly standardized datasets from anatomical imaging data. Such datasets can support large-scale studies of complex traits or clinical studies related to precision medicine or clinical trials. We have developed a method that generates three-dimensional landmark data that meet the requirements of standard geometric morphometric analyses. The method is robust and can be implemented without high-performance computing resources. We validated the method using both direct comparison to manual landmarking on the same individuals and also analyses of the variation patterns and outlier patterns in a large dataset of automated and manual landmark data. Direct comparison of manual and automated landmarks reveals that automated landmark data are less variable, but more highly integrated and reproducible. Automated data produce covariation structure that closely resembles that of manual landmarks. We further find that while our method does produce some landmarking errors, they tend to be readily detectable and can be fixed by adjusting parameters used in the registration and control-point steps. Data generated using the method described here have been successfully used to study the genomic architecture of facial shape in two different genome-wide association studies of facial shape.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".