Really lovely and clear poster! This is such important research given the rise of knife crime in the UK. It's also excellent to see the application of an empirical 3D approach, do you think this approach removes some of the bias from the interpretation?
Will you look into machine learning / artificial intelligence at all? Or are you focussing on PCA and DF (I see you already have lots more research planned!).
Thank you for your lovely comment! I do think this method does help to remove some of the bias when analysing the cut marks, especially in those that are produced by very similar weapon classes such as two serrated knives for example.
I will primarily focus on the PCA and DF but machine learning is an interesting avenue for further research. It would be interesting to see how AI/machine learning would identify weapon type verses a human practitioner.
Really interesting, there's room for a lot more investigation.
Absolutely I agree! Thanks Rebecca, I look forward to seeing your future results!
How did you define the homology of your landmarks? Zooming in on Fig. 2, I see that you have three points on the blunt end of the knife and one on the sharp end (type 1 and 2 landmarks). I assume two additional landmarks were defined as the midpoints (type 2 landmarks). Perhaps anything beyond that is a reach and should just be lumped as semi-landmarks (type 3)?
Were the serrated knives used similar in shape and size? Consider including a side-by-side photo(s) with a scale? I will be interested in seeing the discriminatory power when the sample size increases significantly... objects of different composition (blade vs. glass) but with similar length and width. When you have a sample size of two, it is essentially A or B.
Thank you for your comments.
I choose the landmarks after assessing the general shape of all the cut marks. As all the cut marks were incisions, it was easier to determine where the homologous landmarks would go. There were 10 fixed landmarks to try and cover as much of the shape as possible, but I will look at reducing these and including more semi landmarks as suggested as not all cut marks created will necessarily been incisions and therefore the landmarks will not homologous. I did have some trouble with this is an earlier pilot study.
I did have a knife picture on the poster but substituted it for an example of one of the cut marks. The knives were similar in size but were slightly different in shape (I can post a picture on Twitter if you like?). Yes an increased sample with more knives is the next step! I did not think of glass as being a material to investigate, could be an interesting comparison.
Yes, when I wrote about homologous landmarks, I was already thinking ahead about "sharps" made from different materials. :-)
No worries about the knife picture. I understand poster space is limited.
I'm a CSI, so I see a variety of sharps in fatal stabbing cases. Knives mostly, of course, but we won't have a complete picture unless we understand the range of shape variability. That's my GM background in paleoanthro speaking.
Look forward to more of this stuff in the future.
Thank you for sharing your work!
I really like the design of this poster. This research sounds very interesting and I would love to hear about future research!
Thank you Kathryn! Of course will be sharing my research through conferences, Twitter and some publications hopefully.
Very interesting work and I think this has a great deal of potential. I shall look forward to reading your further research on this.
Dr Steve Walden
My apologies, that should have read hello Rebecca!
Thank you for your comment!