Analysis of facial skeletal asymmetry during foetal development using μCT imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Asymmetry has been noted in the human craniofacial region in several pathological conditional and growth abnormalities, often with a directional predilection. Physiological asymmetry has also been reported in normal adults and adolescents, with certain regions of the cranioskeleton, such as the mandible, displaying prevalent asymmetry. However, the timing at which such asymmetries arise has not been evaluated. The objectives of this study were to assess the degree of asymmetry in facial bones during the foetal stages of human development. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-one preserved conceptuses from the Congenital Anomaly Research Center at Kyoto University, between ages 15 and 20 weeks of gestation, were studied using high-resolution μCT imaging. Asymmetry analysis was performed on digitally segmented facial bone pairs, using geometric morphometric (GM) approaches as well as adapted deformation-based asymmetry (DBA) methods. RESULTS: GM analysis revealed that the developing facial bones display statistically significant fluctuating and directional asymmetry. DBA methods suggest that the magnitude of asymmetry in facial bones is low and does not appear to be correlated to the estimate of overall size of conceptus. Additionally, the patterns of asymmetry are highly variable between individual specimens. CONCLUSIONS: The developing foetal facial skeleton displays variable patterns of low magnitude asymmetry. GM and DBA methods offer unique advantages to assess facial asymmetry quantitatively and qualitatively.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".