## 3 Results  
Table 3 provides the descriptive statistics reported on the stone casts and digitally printed models from the three tested groups (ALG, PVS-2, and DIGITAL) and typodont master cast in each dimension (HAPS, HAPC, HCA, and V). Testing of the first null hypothesis required three comparisons (ALG vs. typodont master cast, PVS-2 vs. typodont master cast, and digitally printed models vs. typodont master cast) for each dimension (Table 4). Pairwise comparisons were carried out using \(t\)-tests and revealed that the horizontal anteroposterior straight (HAPS), horizontal anteroposterior curved (HAPC), horizontal cross-arch (HCA), and vertical (V) dimensions on the typodont master cast and stone casts generated from the ALG and PVS-2 impression materials and digital models were significantly different (\(p<0.001\)). In general, all measurements on stone casts produced by ALG and PVS-2 impression materials were significantly lower than those for the master cast (\(p<0.001\)) at HAPC and V dimensions, but were significantly higher than those for the master cast (\(p<0.001\)) at HAPS and HCA dimensions, whereas the measurements on the digitally printed models were significantly higher than those for \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Typodont Model**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ALG**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**PVS-2**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**DIGITAL**} \\ \hline
**Dimension (mm)** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** \\ \hline HAPS & 15.100 & 0.00 & 15.313 * & 0.03 & 15.188 * & 0.04 & 15.567 * & 0.05 \\ HAPC & 41.538 & 0.00 & 41.406 * & 0.08 & 41.387 * & 0.05 & 41.748 * & 0.05 \\ HCA & 45.019 & 0.00 & 45.322 * & 0.06 & 45.264 * & 0.06 & 45.279 * & 0.05 \\ Vertical & 4.310 & 0.00 & 4.082 * & 0.11 & 4.113 * & 0.01 & 4.096 * & 0.01 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
* Significant compared to typodont master model at \(p\leq 0.05\). SD—standard deviation; ALG—alginate; PVS—two-step putty-wash polyvinyl siloxane; HAPS—horizontal anteroposterior straight; HAPC—horizontal anteroposterior curved; HCA—horizontal cross-arch.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Measurements of stone casts and typodont master casts (mm). the master cast (_p_ < 0.001) at HAPS, HAPC, and HCA dimensions, but were significantly lower than those for the master cast (_p_ < 0.001) at the V dimension. To test the second hypothesis, one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the differences in accuracy of the casts made by the two impression materials and the digital system. According to Table 5, there was a significant difference in means only at the HAPS and HAPC dimensions location (_p_ < 0.001), but there was no significant difference in means at the HCA and V dimensions location (_p_ > 0.05). Further analysis using [PERSON]'s HSD post hoc test was conducted among the three groups in the two dimensions location (HAPS and HAPC; Table 6). A statistically significant difference in the two dimensions (HAPS and HAPC) of the stone casts was detected among the three groups (ALG, PWAS-2, and CAD/CAM) (exception between ALG and PVS-2 at the HAPC dimension). In general, casts made from both ALG and PWAS-2 impression