## 3 Results
### Accuracy
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameters of Evaluation**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Operator**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameters**} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Edx_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Edy_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Edz_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Ed_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Adv_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Adv_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Adz_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Ad_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Ang_} \\ \hline  & & mean & 0.14 & 0.16 & 0.74 & 0.8 & 0.15 & 0.25 & 0.76 & 0.85 & 1.05 \\  & & SD & 0.10 & 0.13 & 0.45 & 0.43 & 0.10 & 0.21 & 0.44 & 0.39 & 0.53 \\  & & minimum & 0.00 & 0.01 & 0.08 & 0.22 & 0.17 & 0.00 & 0.03 & 0.36 & 0.24 \\  & & maximum & 0.34 & 0.61 & 1.92 & 1.92 & 0.41 & 1.15 & 1.92 & 1.93 & 2.13 \\ \cline{2-10}  & & \multirow{2}{*}{2} & mean & 0.28 & 0.31 & 0.75 & 0.91 & 0.28 & 0.43 & 0.77 & 1.02 & 1.78 \\  & & SD & 0.19 & 0.22 & 0.49 & 0.46 & 0.22 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.45 & 1.12 \\  & & minimum & 0.41 & 0.01 & 0.00 & 0.19 & 0.00 & 0.01 & 0.01 & 0.24 & 0.13 \\  & & maximum & 0.83 & 0.76 & 2.02 & 2.15 & 0.88 & 1.11 & 1.96 & 2.27 & 4.13 \\ \hline  & & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & mean & 0.15 & 0.3 & 0.22 & 0.45 & 0.18 & 0.32 & 0.22 & 0.48 & 1.03 \\  & & SD & 0.12 & 0.2 & 0.19 & 0.23 & 0.13 & 0.25 & 0.18 & 0.24 & 0.47 \\  & & minimum & 0.00 & 0.01 & 0.01 & 0.16 & 0.02 & 0.01 & 0.01 & 0.21 & 0.11 \\  & & maximum & 0.5 & 0.71 & 0.92 & 1.18 & 0.63 & 1.07 & 0.84 & 1.36 & 2.19 \\ \cline{2-10}  & & \multirow{2}{*}{2} & mean & 0.16 & 0.58 & 0.52 & 0.87 & 0.23 & 0.57 & 0.53 & 0.95 & 1.58 \\  & & SD & 0.13 & 0.36 & 0.41 & 0.45 & 0.19 & 0.43 & 0.45 & 0.42 & 0.97 \\  & & minimum & 0.01 & 0.07 & 0.07 & 0.13 & 0.01 & 0.01 & 0.07 & 0.24 & 0.04 \\  & & maximum & 0.49 & 1.23 & 1.65 & 1.77 & 0.64 & 1.5 & 1.78 & 1.79 & 3.62 \\ \hline  & & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & mean & 0.15 & 0.33 & 0.23 & 0.47 & 0.17 & 0.34 & 0.23 & 0.49 & 1.05 \\  & & SD & 0.1 & 0.27 & 0.15 & 0.27 & 0.14 & 0.25 & 0.15 & 0.25 & 0.57 \\  & & minimum & 0.01 & 0.01 & 0.00 & 0.09 & 0.00 & 0.01 & 0.01 & 0.06 & 0.21 \\  & & maximum & 0.4 & 0.86 & 0.65 & 1.04 & 0.55 & 0.89 & 0.63 & 1.06 & 2.66 \\ \cline{2-10}  & & \multirow{2}{*}{2} & mean & 0.15 & 0.49 & 0.48 & 0.77 & 0.22 & 0.65 & 0.41 & 0.89 & 1.58 \\  & & SD & 0.11 & 0.32 & 0.33 & 0.34 & 0.17 & 0.42 & 0.27 & 0.36 & 0.83 \\  & & minimum & 0.01 & 0.03 & 0.02 & 0.07 & 0.01 & 0.04 & 0.02 & 0.3 & 0.08 \\  & & maximum & 0.43 & 1.24 & 1.05 & 1.44 & 0.63 & 1.65 & 1.01 & 1.77 & 3.19 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Means, SDs (Standard Deviations), and extreme values for each operator from the three methods of evaluation. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameters of Evaluation**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Operator**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameters**} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Edx_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Edy_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Edz_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Ed_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Adv_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Adv_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Adv_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Adz_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Adj_} & \multirow{2}{*}{_Ang_} \\ \hline  & & mean & 0.14 & 0.16 & 0.74 & 0.8 & 0.15 & 0.25 & 0.76 & 0.85 & 1.05 \\  & & SD & 0.10 & 0.13 & 0.45 & 0.43 & 0.10 & 0.21 & 0.44 & 0.39 & 0.53 \\  & & minimum & 0.00 & 0.01 & 0.08 & 0.22 & 0.17 & 0.00 & 0.03 & 0.36 & 0.24 \\  & & maximum & 0.34 & 0.61 & 1.92 & 1.92 & 0.41 & 1.15 & 1.92 & 1.93 & 2.13 \\ \cline{2-10}  & & \multirow{2}{*}{2} & mean & 0.28 & 0.31 & 0.75 & 0.91 & 0.28 & 0.43 & 0.77 & 1.02 & 1.78 \\  & & SD & 0.19 & 0.22 & 0.49 & 0.46 & 0.22 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.45 & 1.12 \\  & & minimum & 0.41 & 0.01 & 0.00 & 0.19 & 0.00 & 0.01 & 0.01 & 0.24 & 0.13 \\A statistically significant difference (\(p<0.05\)) resulted between method n.1 and both the methods n.2 and n.3, except for the \(Adx\) and \(Ang\) values, with no differences between the n.2 and n.3 optic scanner evaluations for all the variables (Table 3). The mean values from the three methods were 0.57 mm (\(Ed\)), 0.60 mm (\(Ad\)), and 1.04\({}^{\circ}\) (\(Ang\)) for the first, and 0.85 mm (\(Ed\)), 0.95 mm (\(Ad\)), and 1.64\({}^{\circ}\) (\(Ang\)) for the second operator.