AutoMCA: A Robust Approach for Automatic Measurement of Cranial Angles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Head posture assessment commonly involves measuring cranial angles, with photogrammetry favored for its simplicity over CT scans or goniometers. However, most photo-based measurements remain manual, making them time-consuming and inefficient. Existing automatic measuring approaches often requires specific markers and clean backgrounds, limiting their usability. We present AutoMCA, a robust automatic measurement system for cranial angles using accessible markers and tolerating typical indoor backgrounds. AutoMCA integrates MediaPipe Pose, a machine-learning solution, for head–neck segmentation and applies color thresholding and morphological operations for marker detection. Validation tests demonstrated Pearson correlation coefficients above 0.98 compared to manual Kinovea measurements for both the craniovertebral angle (CVA) and cranial rotation angle (CRA), confirming high accuracy. Further validation on individuals with neck disorders showed similarly strong correlations, supporting clinical applicability. Speed comparison tests revealed that AutoMCA significantly reduces measurement time compared to traditional photogrammetry. Robustness tests confirmed reliable performance across varied backgrounds and marker types. In conclusion, AutoMCA measures head posture efficiency and lowers the requirements for instruments and space, making the assessment more versatile and applicable.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
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".