The accuracy of automated facial landmarking - a comparative study between Cliniface software and patch-based Convoluted Neural Network algorithm.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Bodore Al-Baker, Xiangyang Ju, Peter Mossey, Ashraf Ayoub
{"title":"The accuracy of automated facial landmarking - a comparative study between Cliniface software and patch-based Convoluted Neural Network algorithm.","authors":"Bodore Al-Baker, Xiangyang Ju, Peter Mossey, Ashraf Ayoub","doi":"10.1093/ejo/cjaf009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Automatic landmarking software packages simplify the analysis of the 3D facial images. Their main deficiency is the limited accuracy of detecting landmarks for routine clinical applications. Cliniface is readily available open-access software for automatic facial landmarking, its validity has not been fully investigated.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Evaluate the accuracy of Cliniface software in comparison with the developed patch-based Convoluted Neural Network (CNN) algorithm in identifying facial landmarks.</p><p><strong>Materials /methods: </strong>The study was carried out on 30 3D photographic images; twenty anatomical facial landmarks were used for the analysis. The manual digitization of the landmarks was repeated twice by an expert operator, which considered the ground truth for the analysis. Each 3D facial image was imported into Cliniface software, and the landmarks were detected automatically. The same set of the facial landmarks were automatically detected using the developed patch-based CNN algorithm. The 3D image of the face was subdivided into multiple patches, the trained CNN algorithm detected the landmarks within each patch. Partial Procrustes Analysis was applied to assess the accuracy of automated landmarking. The method allowed the measurement of the Euclidean distances between the manually detected landmarks and the corresponding ones generated by each of the two automated methods. The significance level was set at 0.05 for the differences between the measured distances.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall landmark localization error of Cliniface software was 3.66 ± 1.53 mm, Subalar exhibiting the largest discrepancy of more than 8 mm in comparison with the manual digitization. Stomion demonstrated the smallest error. The patch-based CNN algorithm was more accurate than Cliniface software in detecting the facial landmarks, it reached the same level of the manual precision in identifying the same points. The inaccuracy of Cliniface software in detecting the facial landmarks was significantly higher than the manual landmarking precision.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The study was limited to one centre, one groups of 3D images, and one operator.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The patch-based CNN algorithm provided a satisfactory accuracy of automatic landmarks detection which is satisfactory for the clinical evaluation of the 3D facial images. Cliniface software is limited in its accuracy in detecting certain landmark which bounds its clinical application.</p>","PeriodicalId":11989,"journal":{"name":"European journal of orthodontics","volume":"47 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11923742/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjaf009","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Automatic landmarking software packages simplify the analysis of the 3D facial images. Their main deficiency is the limited accuracy of detecting landmarks for routine clinical applications. Cliniface is readily available open-access software for automatic facial landmarking, its validity has not been fully investigated.

Objectives: Evaluate the accuracy of Cliniface software in comparison with the developed patch-based Convoluted Neural Network (CNN) algorithm in identifying facial landmarks.

Materials /methods: The study was carried out on 30 3D photographic images; twenty anatomical facial landmarks were used for the analysis. The manual digitization of the landmarks was repeated twice by an expert operator, which considered the ground truth for the analysis. Each 3D facial image was imported into Cliniface software, and the landmarks were detected automatically. The same set of the facial landmarks were automatically detected using the developed patch-based CNN algorithm. The 3D image of the face was subdivided into multiple patches, the trained CNN algorithm detected the landmarks within each patch. Partial Procrustes Analysis was applied to assess the accuracy of automated landmarking. The method allowed the measurement of the Euclidean distances between the manually detected landmarks and the corresponding ones generated by each of the two automated methods. The significance level was set at 0.05 for the differences between the measured distances.

Results: The overall landmark localization error of Cliniface software was 3.66 ± 1.53 mm, Subalar exhibiting the largest discrepancy of more than 8 mm in comparison with the manual digitization. Stomion demonstrated the smallest error. The patch-based CNN algorithm was more accurate than Cliniface software in detecting the facial landmarks, it reached the same level of the manual precision in identifying the same points. The inaccuracy of Cliniface software in detecting the facial landmarks was significantly higher than the manual landmarking precision.

Limitations: The study was limited to one centre, one groups of 3D images, and one operator.

Conclusions: The patch-based CNN algorithm provided a satisfactory accuracy of automatic landmarks detection which is satisfactory for the clinical evaluation of the 3D facial images. Cliniface software is limited in its accuracy in detecting certain landmark which bounds its clinical application.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

人脸自动标记的准确性——cliiniface软件与基于补丁的卷积神经网络算法的比较研究。
背景:自动地标软件包简化了3D面部图像的分析。它们的主要缺陷是在常规临床应用中检测标志物的准确性有限。Cliniface是一种开放存取的自动面部标记软件,其有效性尚未得到充分的研究。目的:评价clinifface软件与基于patch的卷积神经网络(CNN)算法在识别面部标志方面的准确性。材料/方法:研究对象为30张三维摄影图像;20个解剖面部标志被用于分析。由专家操作员重复两次手动数字化地标,该操作员考虑了分析的地面真相。每张三维人脸图像导入clinifface软件,自动检测地标。使用开发的基于patch的CNN算法自动检测同一组面部地标。将人脸三维图像细分为多个小块,训练后的CNN算法检测每个小块内的地标。应用部分普鲁克斯分析来评估自动地标的准确性。该方法可以测量人工检测到的地标与两种自动方法产生的相应地标之间的欧几里得距离。测量距离之间的差异的显著性水平设为0.05。结果:clinifface软件的整体地标定位误差为3.66±1.53 mm,其中Subalar与人工数字化相比误差最大,误差大于8 mm。Stomion的误差最小。基于patch的CNN算法在识别面部地标上的准确率高于clininiface软件,在识别相同的点上达到了与人工相同的精度水平。Cliniface软件检测面部地标的不准确性显著高于人工地标精度。局限性:研究仅限于一个中心,一组3D图像和一名操作员。结论:基于patch的CNN算法具有令人满意的自动地标检测精度,可满足临床对三维人脸图像的评价。Cliniface软件在检测某些标志的准确性方面受到限制,这限制了它的临床应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European journal of orthodontics
European journal of orthodontics 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
71
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Orthodontics publishes papers of excellence on all aspects of orthodontics including craniofacial development and growth. The emphasis of the journal is on full research papers. Succinct and carefully prepared papers are favoured in terms of impact as well as readability.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信