Tracking the anatomical acromion pattern following Bigliani’s classification: A contrast between two distinct human population groups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anatomical shape of the acromion (AC) has clinicopathological implications in impingement syndrome and rotator cuff tearing due to the subacromial space, which is subjected to biomechanical stress. An ongoing debate persists as to whether the different AC shapes are innate or are acquired over time by life history variables. Previous studies on scapulae morphology led Bigliani et al. 1986 to classify different AC morphology based on a small sample of cadavers. This study compares AC anatomy between two distinct groups: a cadaveric sample of contemporary mixed‐American populations and an archaeological sample representing pre‐European contact Ipiutak (500 BCE – 500 CE) and Tigara (1300 – 1700 CE) Inuit populations. Anthropometric data was collected on 217 scapulae from SUNY Downstate College of Medicine (cadavers n=176) and the American Museum of Natural History (archaeological n=41). Classification of flat (Type I), curved (Type II), and hooked (Type III) shapes were assessed via digital photographic data analysis using the imageJ NIH software. Of the 176 AC studied, 23.9 percent were flat, 39.2 percent were curved, and 39.9 percent were hooked. These results are consistent with Bigliani et al. 1986. Data from Inuit populations, however, are comparatively variable to the 1986 study. Of the 41 Inuit scapulae, 10.0 percent were flat, 55.0 percent were curved, and 35.0 percent were hooked. Based on these results, this study infers that lifeways are a primary contributing source in acromion morphology and it is not necessarily congenital.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".