1999
DOI: 10.1109/42.811270
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automated model-based tissue classification of MR images of the brain

Abstract: We describe a fully automated method for model-based tissue classification of magnetic resonance (MR) images of the brain. The method interleaves classification with estimation of the model parameters, improving the classification at each iteration. The algorithm is able to segment single- and multispectral MR images, corrects for MR signal inhomogeneities, and incorporates contextual information by means of Markov random Fields (MRF's). A digital brain atlas containing prior expectations about the spatial loc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
796
0
9

Year Published

2004
2004
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 926 publications
(808 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
3
796
0
9
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, the initial hard classification and correction of intensity nonuniformity can be performed with other methods than those applied in this study. The state of the art algorithms for these tasks (such as Marroquin et al, 2002;Van Leemput et al, 1999;Zhang et al, 2001) are however more time consuming than the methods applied in this study. Moreover, the robustness in parameter estimation compensates also for classification errors as was shown with misregistered Brainweb images.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the initial hard classification and correction of intensity nonuniformity can be performed with other methods than those applied in this study. The state of the art algorithms for these tasks (such as Marroquin et al, 2002;Van Leemput et al, 1999;Zhang et al, 2001) are however more time consuming than the methods applied in this study. Moreover, the robustness in parameter estimation compensates also for classification errors as was shown with misregistered Brainweb images.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, an expectation maximization segmentation (EMS) algorithm including correction for intensity inhomogeneity (31, 32) was applied to the T1w image with supplementary T2w image input, to separate skull, scalp, extracranial tissue, cerebellum, and brain stem (at the level of the diencephalon) from the rest of brain volume. The remaining brain volume was voxel-wise classified into fractions of cerebral white matter (WM), cortical gray matter (GM), and sulcal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Through the registration of an individual parcel, by matching the sulcal boundaries, its mesh gets stretched and deformed but the neighborhood of individual vertices is preserved and as a matter of consequence of the ROIs lying in that parcel. It is worth mentioning that prior to this operation the T1-weighted image had been registered onto the space of the diffusion data with an affine registration technique (Van Leemput et al, 1999).…”
Section: Cortical Registrationmentioning
confidence: 99%