MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401648214 · doi:10.1080/00085030.2024.2388649

Metric pair-matching of calcanei in cases of commingled human remains: examining 21st century black, white, and Coloured South African populations

2024· article· en· W4401648214 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kayla Orr, Shelby Scott, Tanya R. Peckmann, Susan Meek, Claudia E. Garrido-Varas

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Society of Forensic Science Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of TorontoNova Scotia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatching (statistics)Facet (psychology)PopulationFluctuating asymmetryDorsumAsymmetryBiologyWhite (mutation)AnatomyDemographyMathematicsStatisticsEvolutionary biologyGeneticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aimed to establish an accurate method of osteometric pair-matching calcanei in White, Black, and Coloured South Africans. Paired calcanei of 419 adult individuals (210 males, 209 females) were utilized. Both the left and right calcanei of 139 White South Africans (70 males, 69 females), 140 Black South Africans (70 males, 70 females), and 140 Coloured South Africans (70 males, 70 females) were examined. Six measurements were collected from each calcaneus. The variables that exhibited the least amount of directional and absolute asymmetry were maximum length (MAXL) and middle breadth (MIDB). The variables that exhibited greater degrees of directional and absolute asymmetry were articular facet dimensions (dorsal articular facet length (DAFL), dorsal articular facet breadth (DAFB), middle articular facet length (MAFL), and middle articular facet breadth (MAFB)). There were no statistically significant differences in directional and absolute asymmetry between sexes for most variables. There were statistically significant differences in ­absolute asymmetry between the three South African populations for some variables. Therefore, population-specific osteometric pair-matching methods are necessary. The statistic M was utilized to create reference tables for osteometric pair-matching. The values of M for MAXL for pair-matching comparisons resulted in the greatest reduction in the number of possible pairs with acceptable false rejection rates. The osteometric pair-matching tables from the current study can be utilized, in combination with visual pair-matching techniques, to assist in the resolution of commingled remains cases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.028
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Society of Forensic Science JournalSame topicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207