2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2013.03.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparing two methods of univariate discriminant analysis for sex discrimination in an Iberian population

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
5

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
8
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Also, it is useful for evaluating data from samples with only a reduced number of observations. The method has been used to analyze both specific-interspecific and specific variations and has been employed in different disciplines, such as Palaeontology [132], Archaeology [133], and Forensic Anthropology [134]. In this case, this statistical analysis allowed us to evaluate whether the differences between the averages of the facet angles obtained from our sample is significant enough to distinguish typological categorizations (specifically, the PSSB groupings).…”
Section: Stage 3) Morphometric Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, it is useful for evaluating data from samples with only a reduced number of observations. The method has been used to analyze both specific-interspecific and specific variations and has been employed in different disciplines, such as Palaeontology [132], Archaeology [133], and Forensic Anthropology [134]. In this case, this statistical analysis allowed us to evaluate whether the differences between the averages of the facet angles obtained from our sample is significant enough to distinguish typological categorizations (specifically, the PSSB groupings).…”
Section: Stage 3) Morphometric Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the strive for higher accuracy in sex estimation is ongoing. Presently, some studies have peaked to over 90% accuracy in ancestry estimation, using new approaches such as geometric morphometrics, but these methods as applied to sex estimation have yielded a much lower accuracy of ~70% (Fortes de Oliveira et al, 2012;Jiménez-Arenas & Esquivel, 2013;Murphy & Garvin, 2018;Webster & David Sheets, 2010;Zelditch, Swiderski, & David Sheets, 2012). Our study however harnesses an innovative method-machine learning (Bejdová, Dupej, Krajíček, Velemínská, & Velemínský, 2018;Bewes, Low, Morphett, Pate, & Henneberg, 2019;Gao, Geng, & Yang, 2018).…”
Section: | Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…All craniometric measurements were taken using spreading calipers (0.01 mm). We selected 17 craniometric measurements that are common in sexual dimorphism studies (Dayal, Spocter, & Bidmos, 2008;Fortes de Oliveira et al, 2012;Jaskulska, 2005;Jiménez-Arenas & Esquivel, 2013;Uytterschaut, 1986). The measurements, including the foramen magnum, were performed according to standard protocols set out in Martin and Saller (1956).…”
Section: Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, through partial shape examinations on each of the seven regions, there were indications of strong sexual dimorphism in the midsagittal curve, the upper face, the orbital region, the nasal region, and the palatal region, but no sex variation in the cranium base and the neurocranium configuration. Another study has compared two discriminant function analysis methods on 17 craniometric variables from 90 Iberian skulls [19]. The authors observed higher metric variables in male samples than in female samples [19].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another study has compared two discriminant function analysis methods on 17 craniometric variables from 90 Iberian skulls [19]. The authors observed higher metric variables in male samples than in female samples [19]. Luo et al [20] presented statistical analysis of the holistic shape of the frontal part of the skull using principal component analysis (PCA) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) on Chinese samples.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%