No abstract

The task of segmenting the lung fields, the heart, and the clavicles in standard posterior-anterior chest radiographs is considered. Three supervised segmentation methods are compared: active shape models, active appearance models and a multi-resolution pixel classification method that employs a multi-scale filter bank of Gaussian derivatives and a k-nearest-neighbors classifier. The methods have been tested on a publicly available database of 247 chest radiographs, in which all objects have been manually segmented by two human observers. A parameter optimization for active shape models is presented, and it is shown that this optimization improves performance significantly. It is demonstrated that the standard active appearance model scheme performs poorly, but large improvements can be obtained by including areas outside the objects into the model. For lung field segmentation, all methods perform well, with pixel classification giving the best results: a paired t-test showed no significant performance difference between pixel classification and an independent human observer. For heart segmentation, all methods perform comparably, but significantly worse than a human observer. Clavicle segmentation is a hard problem for all methods; best results are obtained with active shape models, but human performance is substantially better. In addition, several hybrid systems are investigated. For heart segmentation, where the separate systems perform comparably, significantly better performance can be obtained by combining the results with majority voting. As an application, the cardio-thoracic ratio is computed automatically from the segmentation results. Bland and Altman plots indicate that all methods perform well when compared to the gold standard, with confidence intervals from pixel classification and active appearance modeling very close to those of a human observer. All results, including the manual segmentations, have been made publicly available to facilitate future comparative studies.

Quantitative analysis of biological image data generally involves the detection of many subresolution spots. Especially in live cell imaging, for which fluorescence microscopy is often used, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) can be extremely low, making automated spot detection a very challenging task. In the past, many methods have been proposed to perform this task, but a thorough quantitative evaluation and comparison of these methods is lacking in the literature. In this paper, we evaluate the performance of the most frequently used detection methods for this purpose. These include seven unsupervised and two supervised methods. We perform experiments on synthetic images of three different types, for which the ground truth was available, as well as on real image data sets acquired for two different biological studies, for which we obtained expert manual annotations to compare with. The results from both types of experiments suggest that for very low SNRs ( approximately 2), the supervised (machine learning) methods perform best overall. Of the unsupervised methods, the detectors based on the so-called h -dome transform from mathematical morphology or the multiscale variance-stabilizing transform perform comparably, and have the advantage that they do not require a cumbersome learning stage. At high SNRs ( > 5), the difference in performance of all considered detectors becomes negligible.

No abstract

Domain adaptation has become a prominent problem setting in machine learning and related fields. This review asks the question: how can a classifier learn from a source domain and generalize to a target domain? We present a categorization of approaches, divided into, what we refer to as, sample-based, feature-based and inference-based methods. Sample-based methods focus on weighting individual observations during training based on their importance to the target domain. Feature-based methods revolve around on mapping, projecting and representing features such that a source classifier performs well on the target domain and inference-based methods incorporate adaptation into the parameter estimation procedure, for instance through constraints on the optimization procedure. Additionally, we review a number of conditions that allow for formulating bounds on the cross-domain generalization error. Our categorization highlights recurring ideas and raises questions important to further research.