New methodologies and protocols of forensic identification by craniofacial superimposition

Final Report Summary - MEPROCS (New methodologies and protocols of forensic identification by craniofacial superimposition)

Executive Summary:
Craniofacial Superimposition (CFS) has been used for more than one century, and has helped to solve a huge number of identification cases from mass disasters to historical police persecutions, going through terrorism, missing people’s identification, and common grave investigation. However, the most important limitation of the technique is the absence of a systematic CS methodology accepted world-wide, hindering its validity as legal evidence.
MEPROCS aimed at proposing a common EU framework to allow the extensive application of CFS technique in practical forensic identification scenarios commonly tackled by the scientific police units.
This framework included:
i) the implementation of an existing semi-automatic method to assist the forensic experts in the application of the CFS technique, resulting in a simple, quick, and systematic approach;
ii) the definition of standard protocols, leading to the objective application of the CFS technique in different forensic identification scenarios;
iii) the specification of a forensic science methodology to provide an objective evaluation of the forensic identification results achieved by CFS, avoiding particular assumptions that could bias the process.
Hence, the project clearly promoted the validation and exchange of CFS protocols and methodologies among different organisations. The particular objectives of this project concern supporting the development of a trustable CFS methodological framework by fulfilling requirements covering educational, technical, economic, social, and security aspects.
A great interest in MEPROCS was shown by the community of forensic anthropologists thanks to the intense dissemination and networking activities developed. 600 international experts were involved in the external poll launched to get feedback about current practices in the CFS field, and numerous applications were received to become associated partners of the project. Fifteen outstanding institution (CAHID, LABANOF, North Carolina State University, University Sains Malaysia, a.o.) joined MEPROCS consortium along its execution, widening the scope of the studies performed and the impact of its results.
The “Methodology Study” developed in the first stage of the project allowed assessing the reliability of different CFS methodologies and the corresponding technical approaches to this type of identification technique. The “Assessment Study” provided important insights to better understand which CFS criteria are more subjective and which are most/less discriminative criteria, and to propose standards for CFS.
Results of these studies where integrated in the final proposed CFS framework, which included an extensive review of the main sources of error and uncertainty in CFS identification, best practices, practices that should be avoided, protocols for anatomical consistency evaluation and a decision making.
MEPROCS CFS framework was validated by all the partners through the “Reliability Study” in terms of: procedures and materials, set of landmarks and criteria, decision gradual system, and requirements of the technical equipment. The reliability study was also useful to study the influence of the technological means employed, and the knowledge and experience of the practitioner performing the superimpositions.
MEPROCS outcomes where compiled in the “Handbook on Craniofacial Superimposition” (ISBN 978-3-319-11136-0978-3-319-11136-0), that was presented in the International Conference on Craniofacial Superimposition 2014 (ICCFS2014, July 2014, Dundee), the main and final event organized under the umbrella of the project. This handbook will serve CFS experts in their daily work and promote further research in the area.

Project Context and Objectives:
MEPROCS project aimed at proposing a common EU framework to allow the extensive application of the craniofacial superimposition (CFS) technique in practical forensic identification scenarios commonly tackled by the European scientific police units.
This framework included:
i) the implementation of an existing semi-automatic method to assist the forensic experts in the application of the CFS technique, resulting in a simple, quick, and systematic approach;
ii) the definition of standard protocols at European level, leading to the objective application of the CFS technique in different forensic identification scenarios;
iii) the specification of a forensic science methodology to provide an objective evaluation of the forensic identification results achieved by CFS, avoiding particular assumptions that could bias the process.
Hence, the project clearly promoted the validation and exchange of CFS protocols and methodologies among different organisations. The particular objectives of this project concern supporting the development of a trustable CFS methodological framework by fulfilling requirements covering educational, technical, economic, social, and security aspects.
1.2 Description of work performed and main results

As a whole, the project has been developed in time following the planned tasks. This was favored by the strong cooperation among the participating institutions, and collaborators, and their commitment towards the project success.
A great interest in MEPROCS was shown by the community of forensic anthropologists thanks to the intense dissemination and networking activities developed. 600 experts were involved in the external poll launched to get feedback about current practices in the CFS field, and numerous applications were received to become associated partners of the project. The Centre for Anatomy & Human Identification (UK), the Laboratorio di Antropología e Odontologia Forense (Italy), the Regional Bureau of Forensic Medicine, the Vilnius University (Lituania), the Complutense University of Madrid (Spain) and the Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Trieste Unita'di Ricerca Paleoradiologia e Scienze Affini (Italy), joined the project as associated partners. Collaborations with the University Sains Malaysia, the University of Melbourne (Australia), the University Wiener-INML & public Ministry of Peru, the North Carolina State University (USA), the University of Pretoria (South Africa), the National Research Institute of Police Science of Japan, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, University of Health Sciences of Rohtak (South Africa), and the South African Police Service were established. The MEPROCS website (www.meprocs.eu) received numerous visits from all around the world.
An agreement was established with the University of Tennessee to use their data set of around 50 3D skull models and their corresponding facial images. This database was used in the “Methodology Study” focused in assessing the reliability of different CFS methodologies and the corresponding technical approaches to this type of identification technique. The “Assessment Study” was performed during the second period of the project. This novel study provided important insights to better understand the most and less discriminative criteria, which criteria are more subjective. Results of this study were used to propose standards for CFS.
The MEPROCS International Workshop on CFS was the first open event of the project and it took place in February 2013 Granada (Spain). Numerous renowned experts discussed about the CFS technique, the criteria for assessing the consistency of the CFS results, and the CFS reliability. The conclusions of the workshop were used as the basis for the definition of both the semi-automatic methods to asses CFS results, and the whole CFS forensic framework.
The series of discussions held among the most representative experts in CFS to identify and agree on the most relevant aspects to be considered in the proper implementation of CFS technique, and the two experimental studies, were implemented in the MEPROCS framework. It included an extensive review for the identification of the main sources of error in CFS, of the main sources of uncertainty in CFS, best practices in CFS, practices in CFS that should be avoided, a protocol for anatomical consistency evaluation in CFS methods, and a decision making scale.
The proposed CFS framework was validated by all the partners through the “Reliability Study” in terms of: procedures and materials, set of landmarks and criteria, decision gradual system, and requirements of the technical equipment. The reliability study is also useful to study the influence of the technological means employed, and the knowledge and experience of the practitioner performing the superimpositions.
The International Conference on Craniofacial Superimposition 2014 (ICCFS2014) was the main and final event organized under the umbrella of MEPROCS. Held from 30 of June to 4 of July in Dundee (UK), it provided a forum for researchers, practitioners and technicians to share views, ideas and original work, of new insights CFS. At the end of the conference the presentation of the MEPROCS’ handbook on Craniofacial Superimposition took place. It will serve CFS experts in their daily work and to promote further research in the area.
1.3 Expected final results and potential impacts

MEPROCS final goal was the definition of an EU framework to allow overcoming the current limitation of the CFS technique related to the absence of a systematic methodology world-wide accepted, and its extensive application in practical forensic identification scenarios commonly tackled by scientific police units.
With this purpose 25 institution (research centres, police units and universities) all around the world worked together during 24 months through discussion groups, online surveys, workshops, and technical meeting.
Specifically, it was performed: i) the analyses of vast CFS literature (CFS principles, methods classification, case studies, reliability studies, relationship between the skull and the face), ii) three different studies concerning CFS methodologies, assessment and reliability, and iii) the definition of best CFS practices and protocols.
The results of these activities have been compiled in the “Handbook on Craniofacial Superimposition" published by Springer. This handbook will allow the international implementation of the established CFS framework.
The proposed CFS framework is complementary to other forensic identification studies (fingerprints and odontogram comparison, DNA analysis, etc.) that can be integrated when evidences from multiple sources are available.
Moreover, it becomes a cheaper, faster and simpler CFS solution to be implemented in both police stations and headquarters in order to deal with different forensic scenarios as: crime scenes, missing persons, mass disasters, mass graves, terrorism, etc.

Project Results:
MEPROCS final goal was the definition of an EU framework to allow overcoming the current limitation of the CFS technique related to the absence of a systematic methodology world-wide accepted, and its extensive application in practical forensic identification scenarios commonly tackled by scientific police units.
With this purpose 25 institution (research centres, police units and universities) all around the world worked together during 24 months through discussion groups, online surveys, workshops, and technical meeting.
Specifically, it was performed: i) the analyses of vast CFS literature (CFS principles, methods classification, case studies, reliability studies, relationship between the skull and the face), ii) three different studies concerning CFS methodologies, assessment and reliability, and iii) the definition of best CFS practices and protocols.
We describe as follows in detail the work performed during the two years of the project.
The review of the forensic anthropology literature was addressed to extract all the available information about current CFS methods, methodologies and tools used. The work to be developed was assigned to each partner on the bases of their experience: computer-aided CFS methods, photographic and video CS methods, and identification case studies that use CFS. With the purpose of identifying the reported applications of the CS technique through the literature an international poll among the anthropology community was launched. An easy to fill questionnaire was designed by a working group composed by Dr. Kahana (INP), Dr. Codinha (FSC), Mr. Lestón (GC) and Dr. Ibáñez (ECSC), including a specific set of landmarks and mandatory fields. It has to be noticed that the poll was positively received by the forensics community and that 600 experts participated in its completion. A summary of the existing CFS methods and applications was generated from these activities (D1.1).
For the development of the report on internal CFS procedures, protocols, and tools (D1.2) a description of problems and considerations made in each scenario was addressed. We also made use of an internal and an international poll for compiling this information. The bibliography to be reviewed was distributed among the partners, providing a specific set of papers to each of them according to their experience.
To support the performance of these previous activities, and increase its impact and quality, a complete search was performed to identify and create a list of end-users, researchers and laboratories working on the CFS technique all around the world. The criteria followed was to include researchers who have published in Craniofacial Identification (CI), researchers and practitioners who have used or currently use CFS, and other anthropologists and/or police units who could be interested in MEPROCS. The list generated (D1.3) was split in two groups: forensic anthropologists (mainly for dissemination purposes), and another composed by experts in craniofacial identification (for both dissemination and collaboration purposes). From the intense activity developed towards the incorporation of new renowned organisations (D2.1) to the initial consortium (7 partners), 15 new organisations joined MEPROCS.
The definition of standard protocols for the extensive application of the CFS technique required the identification and discussion of the needs, advantages and disadvantages of the different CFS methods (D3.1) presented in the literature. It was organizsed by type of CFS method: photo, video or computer-aided. A detailed description of the CFS scenarios (D3.2) was established by analyzing them and including the number of cases addressed by CFS in each scenario. Such data come from both the MEPROCS international poll and the CFS literature. A standard protocol for each kind of the scenario considered was defined by selecting the best practices identified or elaborating new ones (D3.3 D3.4).
Before starting working with skulls and photos through the network, the MEPROCS Ethical Committee analysed the ethical and legal issues related to the scientific use and sharing of identification cases, including the necessary steps to legally work with skulls. A protocol to be followed was defined (D6.2).
For the specification of validation techniques, previous approaches dealing with manual or semi-automatic assessment of the CS results were reviewed (D4.1). For this purpose, the partners agreed on the need to do a reliability study in order to determine which methods perform better. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of different CFS methodologies and the corresponding technical approaches to this type of identification technique. With all the data generated, some of the most representative experts in craniofacial identification joined in a discussion intended to identify and agree on the most important issues that have to be considered to properly employ CFS technique. As a consequence, they wrote up a manuscript that could be considered the first standard in the field including good and bad practices, sources of error and uncertainties, technological requirements and desirable features, and finally a common scale for the craniofacial matching evaluation.
The material included in this study was human remains data, collected at the University of Tennessee after obtaining informed consent from the responsible party for the deceased, and provided as data to share by the University of Dundee. The information and images provided consisted in ante-mortem photos, pictures of the skulls, and laser scans of the skull.
Each participant on the study tackled with 14 different cases applying the common CFS approach of his/her institution. The exact number of superimpositions performed was 60.
The study was carried out by the following institutions: European Centre for Soft Computing (ECSC), Spain, University of Coimbra (FSC), Portugal, University of Granada (UGR), Spain, University of Dundee (CAHID), Scotland, Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences Institute (LMFSI), Peru, North Carolina State University (NCSU), USA, Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Spain, University of Melbourne (UM), Australia, Azienda Ospadaliera-Universitaria di Trieste (AOUT), Italy, Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), Russia, Portuguese Judiciary Police (PJ), Portugal, Moscow Region State Bureau of Forensic Examination (MRSBFM), Russia, Spanish Civil Guard (GC), Turkish Council of Forensic Medicine (CFM), Turkey, National Research Institute of Police Science (NRIPS), Japan, University of Milan (LABANOF), Italy, South African Police Service (SAPS), University of Pretoria (UP), South Africa, University of Vilnius (UV), Lithuania, University Sains Malaysia (USM), Malaysia. The participants informed consents associated to this study are included in Annex I at the end of this document.
The single provider was the University of Dundee.
After the execution of this study, the analysis of the subjectivity and discriminate power of the different criteria for assessing the skull-face correspondence either proposed in the literature or by any of the MEPROCS partners was addressed to propose a semi-automatic method to assess CFS results (D4.2).
The resulting semi-automatic method compiles useful criteria to be applied in the assessment of consistency between the superimposed cranium and photograph analyzing anatomical criteria such as the concordance between the outlines of the face and the cranium, soft tissue thickness and positional relationship of specific facial and cranial features. The examination criteria used in this protocol are based on previous work by Chai , Austin-Smith , Lan , Yoshino , Jayaprakash , and current approaches followed by the forensic experts involved in MEPROCS.
The robustness and accuracy of the semi-automatic CFS method was asset (D4.4) through a massive experimentation over all the identification cases available. In this sense, it was analysed the subjectivity and discriminate power of the different criteria for assessing the skull-face correspondence either proposed in the literature or by any of the MEPROCS partners. This novel study provided important insights to better understand which are the most and less discriminative criteria, which criteria depend more on the expert who is evaluating it, and which criteria are less subjective. It also gave an idea of how many criteria and which ones are needed to reach a reliable conclusion. Those criteria that resulted to be more discriminatory were later included as a recommended standard for CFS.
The materials used in this study were 9 cases composed by: one or more photographs of the patient and the corresponding 2D projections of the skull contained in Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) collected at the Azienda Ospadaliera-Universitaria di Trieste (AOUTS) and the ECSC. The subjects were submitted to CBCT for clinical purposes. During the same clinical session, the patient was undergoing to CBCT and subsequently some photographs for clinical documentation were taken. The patients expressed their informed consent to the use of their clinical data, anonymised, for study and research purposes.
Each participant were asked to analyse 18 different CFS problems, some of them composed of more than one image of the same subject (24 superimpositions in total). For each pair of skull and face photograph, an optimal or near-optimal skull-face overlay was achieved by previously superimposing the 3D face model over the facial photograph. There were both positive and negative cases among the 20 CFS problems. Each case was composed of a single image with four different layers: face photograph with and without landmarks, skull projection with and without landmarks.
The participants of this study were: ECSC, UGR; VU, NRIPS, UM, USM, UCM, GC, RAS, MRBFM, FSC, INP, SAPS, PJ, LMFSI, CAHID, AOUT, and Labanof. The participants informed consents associated to this study are included in Annex II at the end of this document.
The providers were the AOUTS and ECSC.
The results of the previous studies and experiments were integrated into the CFS framework (D5.1) that included series of practical recommendations, pitfalls to be avoided and a decision scale that attempt to unify the application of CFS. These "best practice" suggestions are not to be deemed as all inclusive or legally bounding, they are the fruit of in-depth discussions among practitioners from all over the world, based on the results of a series of studies conducted during the project. Specifically, it includes:
a) Main sources of error in CFS
• Skull-face overlay, in particular, the adequate perspective of the skull. For example, most of the software programs employed for this task do not allow alteration of the projection, but “just” the orientation and scaling. In many cases it involves an error-prone trial and error process. Orientation + scaling + perspective.
• The digital articulation of the mandible and cranium after scanning can introduce errors. With no access to the occlusion as it was in life, the mandible may have been placed in an incorrect position with respect to the cranium.
• The attachment of the mandible to the cranium.
• The replication of the AM position of the mandible.
• The incomplete preservation and post-mortem reassembly of the skull. For example, the incorrect positioning of teeth in the sockets.
• The inaccurate 3D skull acquisition (or segmentation in case of computed tomography (CT) scanner), precision below < 1 mm and/or specific features not properly scanned (or segmented). The latter was recorded at the nasal region, the teeth and the orbits. Presence of artefacts.
• The aspect ratio of the photograph.
• The unknown origin of the AM photograph.
• The post-mortem skull damage.
All the latter issues are considered sources of errors, thus, they should be considered in order to avoid accumulating and propagating errors during the CFS process. In addition, there are several issues that can negatively affect conclusions based on CFS but, unlike sources of errors, they cannot be avoided. In contrast, they have to be considered an inherent part of the process, and thus, they have to be properly modelled and incorporated in the decision making process. We have referred to these issues as sources of uncertainty since, contrary to complete and precise knowledge; they represent partial, incomplete, imprecise, and/or vague information.
b) Main sources of uncertainty in CFS
• Facial landmark location uncertainty: this is related to the extremely difficult task of locating the points in a completely reproducible manner. The variability may arise from reasons such as:
- Variation in the distribution of shadows that is dependent on lighting condition during photograph.
- Unsuitable camera focusing, especially when the plane of focus is too shallow and hence the critical features are not sharp.
- Poor image quality, i.e. low resolution.
- Face posture in the photograph, i.e. facial expression and angle of view of the face (lateral, frontal, or oblique).
- Partial or total landmark occlusion.
- Imprecise definition of some anthropometric landmark could be either due to ambiguous terminology or poorly anatomical definition.
• Landmark matching uncertainty: refers to the imprecision that is involved in the matching of two sets of potentially corresponding landmarks derived from two different objects, a face and a skull.
- The correspondence between facial and cranial landmarks is not always symmetrical and perpendicular to the skin surface and to the underlying bone.
- The facial soft tissue depth varies for each facial landmark, as well as for different populations (based on age, race, and sex).
- Considerations of how the distances between potentially corresponding landmarks are affected by the posture and facial expression in the image have to be taken into account.
- There are many studies describing the uncertainty related to differing soft tissue depths for different populations but almost none of them considered the projection of those distances onto the AM photograph used in the comparison.
• Skull-face overlay uncertainty: there is no precisely quantifiable way of determining when an accurate superimposition has been achieved.
• There are many unknown (and/or uncertain) parameters involved in the replication of the original photographic conditions used to produce the image employed in the comparison.
• Morphological criteria are subjective or difficult to quantify.
• The amount of morphological criteria that have to be satisfied for a positive identification.
• The effects of dental changes detected from examination of the AM photographs used for comparison with the skull, as well as their accurate interpretation
• Age related changes in the craniofacial morphology children need to be investigated and documented more comprehensively before comparisons between images taken at different times during childhood can be compared.
The following “best practices” and “practices that should be avoided” represent some guidelines to minimize or avoid the main sources of error, as well as dealing with the sources of uncertainty that are concomitant to the application of CFS.
These steps should be viewed as recommendations and under no circumstances should they be perceived as requirements to accomplish a "valid" result. The authors are fully aware that the circumstances of each case are to be taken into consideration, when evaluating the results of identification based on CFS.
c) Best practices in CFS
• Use the real skull to confirm correct fit of the mandible with the cranium.
• Use the real skull and mandible to articulate the dentition and establish centric occlusion.
• Reproduce the position of the mandible as displayed in the AM photographs.
• Locate and mark landmarks on the skull before scanning.
• Use multiple (more than one) AM photographs or frames taken from video with the candidate in different poses, as far as they provide new information, e.g. more anatomical information provided by additional viewpoints.
• Use AM photographs of good quality. For optimal examination, the face resolution in frontal images should be at least 180 pixels corresponding to the width of the head, or roughly 90 pixels between the pupils of the eyes. (ISO International Standard ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 37 N506).
• Avoid images with obscuring objects, e.g. spectacles and beards.
• During the growth period of children’s lives, always use the most recent AM photographs. For adults, use the most informative photographs.
• Perform CFS using original AM images, avoiding as much as possible image manipulation.
• Throughout the entire CFS process is careful to preserve the aspect ratio of the photograph.
• Keep all the information contained within the original image (do not use cropped images which introduces error).
• Extract as much as possible information from the photograph (digital and visual information) to infer original photographic conditions.
• Analyze and describe separately both the skull and the face in the photograph (s) to be compared. This will include (general morphology, specific dimensions, and any special, potentially individualizing, characteristics) prior to superimposition.
• When multiple candidates are available sort AM photographs to be compared by reference to the existing description of the skull and prioritize them in a sequence of most to least likely to correspond.
• Use as many criteria as possible in order to study the relationship between the face and the skull.
• Consider the discriminative “power” of each anatomical criterion.
• Give an appropriate “weight” to each criterion according to the degree of uncertainty related to it, which will depend also on the AM view.
d) Practices in CFS that should be avoided
• Confirmation bias (e.g. coercive situations with investigating authorities, a misplaced enthusiasm to be a good citizen and be helpful etc.).
• Attempt CFS on edentulous skulls (except in cases where skull morphology is highly individualizing with extreme malformations).
• Using just one single, low resolution, frontal passport-style photograph for comparison.
• Cases where the subject is under the age of five years.
In close relation the technological means employed must also be considered. If these do not fulfil some basic requirements they can be part of the problem, generating errors and/or introducing more uncertainty. In contrast, they can provide an invaluable support when they incorporate, together with those requirements, some desirable features that help to reduce errors, uncertainty and the time employed. While the requirements list is intended to be a complete list of features that all the equipment have to fulfil, the desirable features should be considered an open list that can increase in line with the new research advances in the field. The following two Tables (1 and 2) are devoted to both the requirements and desirable features of the two main technological approaches that coexist in CFS: computer-aided and video superimposition.
The proposed CFS framework was validated (D5.2) by means of the Reliability Study. Partners were asked to deal with a variable (according to their availability) number of CFS cases (positives and negatives) following all the recommendations collected within the framework referring to the procedure and the materials, the set of landmarks and criteria, the decision gradual system, and the requirements of the technical equipment. The current study will also serve to give an idea of the reliability of the methodology proposed. In addition, it can be also useful to study the influence of the technological means employed and the knowledge and experience of the practitioner performing the superimpositions.
A total of 8 different case studies were provided to the participants. Each CFS case was composed of either an unknown skull (3D model) and four candidates (each of them with a set of ante-mortem photographs) or an unknown person (with a number of ante-mortem photographs) and four candidate skulls. Each of them involve 4 CFS identifications leading to a total number of 4-12 skull-face overlays problems each case study. The exact number of superimpositions to be performed depends on each case study.
The participants of this study were: the LMFSI, MRBFM, LABANOF, AOUTS, , NRIPS, GC, PJ., UM, UCM, RAS, and UGR. The participants informed consents associated to this study are included in Annex III at the end of this document.
The provider was Vilnius University and LABANOF. The material included in this study was human remains data (3D skull model and ante-mortem photographs), collected the latter institutions after obtaining informed consent from the responsible party for the deceased
The results of all the studies performed have been compiled in the “Handbook on Craniofacial Superimposition" (ISBN 978-3-319-11136-0) published by Springer. This handbook will allow the international implementation of the established CFS framework.
The proposed CFS framework is complementary to other forensic identification studies (fingerprints and odontogram comparison, DNA analysis, etc.) that can be integrated when evidences from multiple sources are available.
Moreover, it becomes a cheaper, faster and simpler CFS solution to be implemented in both police stations and headquarters in order to deal with different forensic scenarios as: crime scenes, missing persons, mass disasters, mass graves, terrorism, etc.

Potential Impact:
Dissemination activities played a key role in MEPROCS in order to create ample awareness in European stakeholders about the projects results, and increase its wide implementation. In this sense, liaison with other projects, networks, organizations and companies were established. We organised events open to external experts, participated in international workshop and conferences, and obtained a strong coverage in the media.

A dissemination plan was designed at the beginning of the project (D7.1) for establishing the strategy and the guidelines for preparing the promotional material and organising the open activities in order to achieve the highest stakeholders’ participation as and producing a multiplier effect. The project also focused on academia by providing standard methodologies and protocols that could be included in future forensic science curricula. To optimise the value of the project, strengthening its impact, to transfer and to integrate it in a sustainable manner into a broader context, the dissemination plan identified what to disseminate, who needs to know and what, when it should happen, and how it could be done

The dissemination strategy had two different but complementary phases. The first phase was mainly considered the dissemination of MEPROCS activities (meetings, workshops, final event, etc.) and the consolidation of the network by involving other experts. The second phase dealt with the dissemination of the project outcomes. They ran in parallel, but the first phase started from the beginning of the project life while the second one did when achievements to communicate to a wider public and/or to the society were generated.
In the first months of the project the MEPROCS’ Webpage (D7.2) was launched (www.meprocs.eu). It was designed in order to facilitate the access to the information of the project: objectives, participants, activities, etc. Templates for being used in the conferences, a logo, and several etc., were provided to all the partners. To prompt one of the main activities of the action, the consolidation of the network, a procedure to apply for becoming associated partner of the project was defined, including the proper template and a specific section on the project webpage. To maximise the impact of the project beyond its execution, the project webpage will be maintained during three years after the project completion.
MEPROCS liaised with other FP7 forensic projects. In particular, collaborated with the directly related project “FAST and efficient international disaster victim Identification” (FASTID, project ref. 242339), that started in April 2010. Our previous developments on CFS automation together with the MEPROCS outcomes in CFS standardisation could be a valuable contribution to include CFS as a key-component in the global FASTID identification system.

A great interest in MEPROCS was shown by the community of forensic anthropologists thanks to the intense dissemination and networking activities developed. This is show by the great involvement of forensic experts in the pool launched to get feedback about current practices in the CFS field external (600 experts participated in the pool), and the numerous applications received to become associated partners of MEPROCS (more detail concerning this issue is given in section 5.e). Fifteen outstanding institution (CAHID, LABANOF, North Carolina State University, University Sains Malaysia, a.o.) joined MEPROCS consortium along its execution, widening the scope of the studies performed and the impact of its results. Furthermore, this is also showed by the numerous visits the project webpage is receiving from different stakeholders related with the forensic field (end-users, researchers, SMEs, etc.), and coming from all around the world.
6 papers in peer review have been published and 3 conference contributions:
Publications
Congress
Eugenia Cunha. "New Metholologies and Protocols of Forensic Identification by Craniofacial Superimposition" In: Proceedings of the 65th. Anniversary Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences. Washington DC, 18-23 February, 2013. Pp. 391-392
O. Cordón, S. Damas, O. Ibáñez, I. Alemán, M. Botella, F. Navarro. "Automatic Craniofacial superimposition based on soft computing and computer vision". Proceedings of the European Academy of Forensic Sciences (EAFS'2012), 227-227. The Hague, The Netherlands.
S. Damas, O. cordón, O. Ibáñez, C. Peña, R. del Coso. "New methodologies and protocols of forensic identification by creniofacial superimposition". EAFS 2012, 359. The Hague, The Netherlands.
Journal
Campomanes-Álvarez BR, Ibáñez O, Navarro F, Aelmán I, Damas S, Cordón O. Dispersion assessment in the location of facial landmarks on photographs. International Journal or Legal Medicine. doi: 10.1007/s00411-014-1002-4
Campomanes-Álvarez BR, Cordón O, Damas S, Ibáñez O. Computer-Based Automatic Craniofacial Superimposition in Forensic Identification Using Soft Computing. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing. doi: 10.1007/s12652-012-0168-1

Journal (in press)

Ibáñez O, Cavalli F, Campomanes-Álvarez BR, Campomanes-Álvarez C, Valsecchi A, Hete MI. "Ground trough data generation for skull-face overlay". International Journal of Legal Medicine.
Submitted
Huete, M.I. Kahana, T., Ibáñez, O. (2014). Past, present and future of CFS: literature and international surveys. Universtity of Granada, Spain, Tech. Rep. DECSAI 2014-01. Submitte to Legal Medicine.
Damas S, Wilkinson C, Kahana T, Veselovskaya E, Abramov A, Jankauskas R, Jayaprakash PT, Ruiz E, Navarro F, Huete MI, Cunha E, Cavalli F, Clement J, Lestón P, Molinero F, Briers T, Viegas F, Imaizumi K, Humpire D, Ibáñez O (2014). Study on the performance of different craniofacial superimposition approaches (II): best practices proposal. European Centre for Soft Computing, Spain, Tech. Rep. AFE 2014-17. Submitted to Forensic Sci Int.
Ibáñez O, Vicente R, Navega DS, Wilkinson C, Jayaprakash PT, Huete MI, Briers T, Hardiman R, Navarro F, Ruiz E, Cavalli F, Imaizumi K, Jankauskas R, Veselovskaya E, Abramov A, Lestón P, Molinero F, Cardoso J, Çağdir AS, Humpire D, Nakanishi Y, Zeuner A, Ross AH, Gaudio D, Damas S (2014). Study on the performance of different craniofacial superimposition approaches (I) . European Centre for Soft Computing, Spain, Tech. Rep. AFE 2014-18. Submitted to Forensic Sci Int.
The MEPROCS “Handbook on Craniofacial Superimposition” (ISBN: 978-3-319-11136-0) was the final MEPROCS publication (D7.8) and intended to be the main dissemination tool of the project results. It included a summary of the vast CFS literature analyzed (CFS principles, methods classification, case studies, reliability studies, relationship between the skull and the face), the results and conclusions of the different CFS studies developed by the consortium, and the main conclusions regarding CFS best practices and protocols.
Events and media coverage
During the project KOM the project was presented to the media and the wide public in general. The event was chaired by the Honourable Mayor of Mieres and counted with the presence of the Regional Minister of Economy and Labour of the Principality of Asturias.
The 3rd of May the project coordinator attended to Security Day in Brussels organized by the REA, where practical information about communication, financial aspects, etc., was detailed. This event also offered the chance to meet the MEPROCS PO who provided us some guidance about how to deal with some important issues such as ethics and data protection issues.
22-23 August 2012 the project was presented in La Hague, at the 6th European Academy of Forensic Science (EAFS2012) Venue. This event provided the chance of creating awareness of MEPROCS objectives and results among the forensic community. A stand was installed in this conference that allowed establishing new contacts with different institutions.
A special session (D7.3) of the project was taught in the International Master on Soft Computing and Intelligent Data Analysis coordinated by the ECSC.
From 27 to 29 of May 2013, the MEPROCS international workshop on CS was held in Granada (D7.7). 42 attendees (including 10 external experts from the most representative researchers and practitioners in the field of CS) participated in this event, which aimed at providing a common discussion scenario about the technical MEPROCS objectives. Three work panels were defined: CS methods, Assessing CS results, and CS reliability. First and second panel last six hours, and four for the third one. Each of them comprised two different parts: a set of key notes given mainly by the external researchers and a round table. Each round table was chaired by a MEPROCS member that acted as moderator. Although the round table was composed by the keynote speakers and the moderator, all assistants were allowed to participate. Deliverables D3.1 (CS methods advantages and disadvantages), D4.1 (assessment approaches of the CS results), and D1.1 (summary of the existing applications of CS in different scenarios) were used as a guideline to moderate round tables 1, 2 and 3
The project was also widely disseminated in different international forensic events such as: EAFS 2013, Course at the Council of Forensic Medicine of Turkey (from 20 to 22 February 2013), American Academy of Forensic Science, 65th Anniversary Meeting (Washington DC, from 18 to 23 February 2013), the International Organization of Forensic Odontostomatology (Florence, 29-31 August 2013).
The International Conference in Craniofacial Superimposition (ICCFS2014) was the main and final event organized by MEPROCS. ICCFS2014 was held in Dundee (UK) during the last week of June, 30th of June to 4th of July 2014. It consisted of three different activities: i) the international conference that provided a forum for researchers, practitioners and technicians to share views, present ideas and original work, providing new insights into craniofacial superimposition, ii) the presentation of the Handbook on Craniofacial Superimposition (D7.8) and iii) the training workshop on Craniofacial Superimposition where practitioners were taught with a high quality and specific training program on CFS. The group of experts in charge of the training included recognized researchers in CFS. More than 80 experts in the forensic identification area from all around the world participated in the ICFS2014.
Social Impact
MEPROCS pursues to create the appropriated context for the wide application of CFS techniques. In this sense, standard protocols, validation techniques, were defined for the extensive application of CFS to different forensic scenarios by enhancing the cooperation between forensic anthropologists, technical researchers, and end users.
The high involvement of end users in MEPROCS allowed the design of a CFS forensic identification framework that addresses forensic experts’ real needs in terms of accuracy, standards, reliability, etc. This will easier the wide implementation of the proposed framework and contribute to the adoption of this initiative by other institutions beyond the project scope.
MEPROCS CFS framework will improve the quality and the reliability of the forensic identification results, as well as reduce the time required by the end-users in the identification process by saving time in the intermediate steps required to apply the CFS techniques. It will also favour the acceptance of CS technique in courts, due its standardization.
The need of both a standard methodology and of a commercial product to support the application of the CFS technique are some of the conclusions that can be drawn from the high involvement of 600 experts in the international pools launched by MEPROCS to get feedback about common CFS practices.
During the second stage of the project dissemination activities were focused in securing sustainability in terms of technology, organization, and finance of further initiatives which leads to larger impacts of MEPROCS. Thanks to these activities, several possibilities were identified to keep on collaborating in the expansion of the framework and in related scientific activities by means of new 7FP initiatives
The presence in the consortium of the European Council Legal of Medicine and the support of the International Academy of Legal Medicine, the International Association of Forensic Sciences, and the World Police Medical Officers also favoured increasing the visibility of the project and will contribute to its impact after the project termination.
As it was explained in the MEPROCS proposal, researchers from the ECSC and PAL-UGR have made important achievements in the automation of the CS task, resulting in a European patent application on a computer-based system to assist the forensic anthropologist in the CS task (Cordón 2009). The achievements obtained in MEPROCS will clearly contribute to improve this semi-automatic system, which is already been used to solve a real-world identification cases by the GC, and favour its worldwide commercialization. Furthermore, they will also be implemented in the semi-automatic system developed by the MRBFM (associated partner of the project), and other related solutions already available in market. End-users involved in MEPROCS will benefit of the implementation of the proposed CS framework. To date, all the partners are benefiting from the studies and discussions developed in the projects, in the different topics addressed.
Furthermore, there are some previous and current national and international projects that will benefit from the MEPROCS developments and to contribute to its success, such as the Portuguese national project “Preservation of memories”, and the identification in Latvia of victims of the Soviet dictatorship.
List of Websites:
www.meprocs.eu

Final Report Summary - MEPROCS (New methodologies and protocols of forensic identification by craniofacial superimposition)

Share this page

Download