Evaluation of the Artificial Neural Network and Naive Bayes Models Trained with Vertebra Ratios for Growth and Development Determination
    PDF
    Cite
    Share
    Request
    Original Article
    P: 2-9
    March 2021

    Evaluation of the Artificial Neural Network and Naive Bayes Models Trained with Vertebra Ratios for Growth and Development Determination

    Turk J Orthod 2021;34(1):2-9
    1. Department of Orthodontics, Selçuk University, Faculty of Dentistry, Konya, Turkey
    2. Private Practice, İstanbul, Turkey
    3. Department of Computer Engineering, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya Engineering and Architecture Faculty, Turkey
    No information available.
    No information available
    Received Date: 02.06.2020
    Accepted Date: 22.10.2020
    PDF
    Cite
    Share
    Request

    ABSTRACT

    Objective:

    This study aimed to evaluate the success rates of the artificial neural network models (NNMs) and naive Bayes models (NBMs) trained with various cervical vertebra ratios in cephalometric radiographs for determining growth and development.

    Methods:

    Our retrospective study was performed on 360 individuals between the ages of 8 and 17 years, whose cephalometric radiographs were taken. According to the evaluation of cephalometric radiographs, growth and development periods were divided into 6 vertebral stages. Each stage was considered as a group, each group had 30 girls and 30 boys. Twenty-eight cervical vertebral ratios were obtained by using 10 horizontal and 13 vertical measurements. These 28 vertebral ratios were combined in 4 different combinations, leading to 4 different datasets. Each dataset was split into 2 parts as training and testing. To prevent the overfitting, a 5-cross fold validation technique was also used in the training phase. The experiments were conducted on 2 different train/test ratios as 80%-20% and 70%-30% for both NNMs and NBMs.

    Results:

    The highest determination success rate was obtained in NNM 3 (0.95) and the lowest in NBM 4 (0.50). The determination success of NBM 1 and NBM 3 was almost similar (0.60). The success of NNM 2 did not differ much from that of NNM 1 (0.94). The determination success of stage 5 was relatively lower than the others in NNM 1 and NNM 2 (0.83).

    Conclusion:

    The NNMs were more successful than the NBMs in our developed models. It is important to determine the effective ratio and/or measurements that will be useful for differentiation.

    Article is only available in PDF format. Show PDF
    2024 ©️ Galenos Publishing House