Superimposition Errors in the IMP3D Software

January 23, 2006

H.D.Sheets, Dept. of Physics, Canisius College, 2001 Main St. Buffalo, NY 14208
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Thanks to a query from Jonathan Britton (U. Toronto), I have discovered that I 
have made a substantial in the programming of the Partial Procustes 
Superimposition in the IMP3D programs.  The same superimposition function was 
used throughout the IMP3D series, and thus affects all programs in the series.

Impact

Since this error was in a very fundamental part of any operation on shape, all 
results obtained with the IMP3D series should be regarded as suspect and 
rechecked.  Users of IMP3D are strongly urged to download the revised versions 
posted on my website at: 

http://www2.canisius.edu/~sheets/moremorph.html.  

There are corrected versions of all IMP3D programs with compile dates of 
1/23/06 or later.


Details of the Error

The error was in the calculation of the rigid rotation of a specimen in 3D to 
match to a reference form.  The rotation matrix is calculated by using a 
singular value decomposition, the proper calculation of the rotation matrix H 
necessary to orient the specimen Y on the reference X is obtained by computing:

        A= Y’X

And then obtaining the singular value decomposition of A

        A=USV’

>From which we can obtain the estimate of the rotation H

        H=UV’

The error made in the earlier IMP3D programs was to use A=Y\X, where \ is the 
MATLAB division operator.  This approach yields incorrect results in many cases.

I also checked the performance of the current (fixed) SVD based calculation of 
H by using a numerical estimation procedure to minimize the summed squared 
inter-landmark distances between X and HY, where H is the standard 3D 
rotational matrix in terms of the angles of rotation alpha, beta and gamma 
about the z, x and y axes respectively as detailed in Slice (1996, the White 
Book, page 182).  This procedure used a simplex method to determine the values 
of alpha, beta and gamma that minimized the procrustes distances, and returned 
results identical (within the machine precision) to those obtained using the 
corrected SVD method.

Additional Error in Goodall’s F-test

In addition to the error in the Superimposition common to all IMP3D programs, 
it appears that changes to the Simple3D version (IMP: Simple3D 4/12/05 Variant 
Version with Variance Statistics) introduced an additional error into the 
Goodall’s F-test in this program.  The introduced error squared all the 
distances used in the calculation.  This has been corrected in the latest 
version.
 
How Did This Happen?

I should have caught this programming error prior to release of the software.  
Unfortunately, for the simulated test data I had available, the error does not 
appear.   The correct superimposition calculation and my original incorrect 
method give the same answer for my test data, but Dr. Britton’s data clearly 
illustrated the error.  The programs needed to be checked with multiple data 
sets, which I simply did not do adequately.

I find it difficult to express my level of dismay and alarm at this error, and 
the difficulties it has caused others.  I had created and posted the IMP3D 
programs (which are adaptations of the 2D IMP software) in an effort to support 
and encourage the study of morphology in three dimensions.  I do hope my 
efforts have done more good than harm.

Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have questions about this error, or 
other aspects of IMP software.

-Dave Sheets


H. David Sheets, PhD
Dept of Physics, Canisius College
2001 Main St
Buffalo NY 14208
-- 
Replies will be sent to the list.
For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org

Reply via email to