2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2020.103708
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A diffeomorphic unsupervised method for deformable soft tissue image registration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We have also validated the method quantitatively. We have compared our method with various other diffeomorphic and non-diffeomorphic methods such as [65], [32], [39], [40], [38], and [31], using some popular measures such as mean square error (MSE), normalized cross-correlation (NCC), structural similarity (SS), mutual information (MI), feature similarity index (FSIM), and mean absolute error (MSE) [52]. The results of CT/CT, 3DRA/3DRA, MR/MR, and CT/MR are provided in Table 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have also validated the method quantitatively. We have compared our method with various other diffeomorphic and non-diffeomorphic methods such as [65], [32], [39], [40], [38], and [31], using some popular measures such as mean square error (MSE), normalized cross-correlation (NCC), structural similarity (SS), mutual information (MI), feature similarity index (FSIM), and mean absolute error (MSE) [52]. The results of CT/CT, 3DRA/3DRA, MR/MR, and CT/MR are provided in Table 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…det(Dφ −1 ) < 0 indicates the locations where folding has occurred. The proportion of folding voxels ρ = ∑ δ(det(Dφ −1 )<0) V is computed to evaluate the topology-preserving performance [14]. We conducted experiments on the OASIS-3 dataset to evaluate the performance of the proposed fusion method and to compare it with three state-of-the state methods: AAW, MIScnn [15] and patchify [16].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The network was trained with a combination of four losses, one focusing on the intensity similarity using normalised cross-correlation (L sim ), one focusing on anatomical structures using dice loss (L seg ) and two losses for regularisation of the displacements. The first one was the Jacobian loss which is exploited on different works such as [17,16,26] (L jac ) and the second one enforcing smooth gradients similar to [8] (L smooth ). As such our final loss is: L = (L sim + L seg + αL smooth + βL jac ) M →F + (L sim + L seg + αL smooth + βL jac ) F →M with α and β being the weights of the regularisation losses.…”
Section: Deep Learning-based Registration Schemementioning
confidence: 99%