Unsupervised Deep Feature Learning for Deformable Registration of MR Brain Images
Open accessAbstract
Establishing accurate anatomical correspondences is critical for medical image registration. Although many hand-engineered features have been proposed for correspondence detection in various registration applications, no features are general enough to work well for all image data. Although many learning-based methods have been developed to help selection of best features for guiding correspondence detection across subjects with large anatomical variations, they are often limited by requiring the known correspondences (often presumably estimated by certain registration methods) as the ground truth for training. To address this limitation, we propose using an unsupervised deep learning approach to directly learn the basis filters that can effectively represent all observed image patches. Then, the coefficients by these learnt basis filters in representing the particular image patch can be regarded as the morphological signature for correspondence detection during image registration. Specifically, a stacked two-layer convolutional network is constructed to seek for the hierarchical representations for each image patch, where the high-level features are inferred from the responses of the low-level network. By replacing the hand-engineered features with our learnt data-adaptive features for image registration, we achieve promising registration results, which demonstrates that a general approach can be built to improve image registration by using data-adaptive features through unsupervised deep learning.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Wu et al. firstly proposed to adopt deep learning technology to obtain the similarity metric for registration.
“Wu et al. (56) firstly proposed to adopt deep learning technology to obtain the similarity metric for registration.”
From A review of deep learning-based deformable medical image registration (2022) · cites this paper as [56]
The Abstract and Method §2.2 describe using deep learning to obtain features for detecting correspondences in image registration. Method §2.2 says similarity between those learned feature vectors is measured by normalized cross-correlation, not by a learned similarity metric. The paper also does not establish the claim that Wu et al. were the first to propose this approach; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredWu et al. used convolutional-stacked autoencoder (CAE) to extract discriminative features for 3D deformable brain MRI registration, and registration was performed by optimizing NCC of the two features, achieving improved registration accuracy.
“They adopted convolutional-stacked autoencoder (CAE) to extract the discriminative features for 3D deformable brain MRI registration. Then, the registration was performed by optimizing the NCC of the two features and improved registration accuracy was achieved.”
From A review of deep learning-based deformable medical image registration (2022) · cites this paper as [56]
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 13 · Cited by 149
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- [2]Vercauteren T Diffeomorphic demons: efficient non-parametric image registration NeuroImage 2009 45 1, suppl. 1 S61 S72 19041946
- [3]Liu J Vermuri BC Marroquin JL Local frequency representations for robust multi-modal image registration IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2002 21 5 462 469 12071617
- [4]Ou Y DRAMMS: Deformable registration via attribute matching and mutual-saliency weighting Med. Image Anal 2011 15 4 622 639 20688559 PMC3012150
- [5]Wu G Qi F Shen D Learning-based deformable registration of MR brain images IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2006 25 9 1145 1157 16967800
- [6]Wu G Qi F Shen D Karssemeijer N Lelieveldt B Learning best features and deformation statistics for hierarchical registration of MR brain images IPMI 2007. LNCS 2007 4584 160 171 Springer Heidelberg 17633697
- [7]Le QV Learning hierarchical invariant spatio-temporal features for action recognition with independent subspace analysis 2011 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR
- [8]Hyvarinen A Hoyer P Emergence of phase- and shift-invariant features by decomposition of natural images into independent feature subspaces Neural Comput 2000 12 7 1705 1720 10935923
- [10]Peyrat J Registration of 4D cardiac CT sequences under trajectory constraints with multichannel diffeomorphic demons IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2010 29 7 1351 1368 20304732
- [12]Peyrat J-M Delingette H Sermesant M Pennec X Xu C Ayache N Metaxas D Axel L Fichtinger G Székely G Registration of 4D time-series of cardiac images with multichannel Diffeomorphic Demons MICCAI 2008, Part II. LNCS 2008 5242 972 979 Springer Heidelberg 18982699
- Authors
- Wu, G., Kim, M., Wang, Q., Gao, Y., Liao, S., & Shen, D.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Venue
- Lecture Notes in Computer Science
- Publisher
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
- Published
- 2013
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- Pt 2
- Pages
- 649-656
- ISSN
- 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
- 1611-3349
- PMC
- PMC4073478
- OpenAlex
- W1865800230
- Cited by
- 149
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 4.20
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Aging (R01AG042599, R01AG041721)
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH100217)
- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01EB008374, R01EB009634, R01EB006733)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Keywords
- deformable image registration, MR brain images, correspondence detection, anatomical variation
- MeSH terms
- Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, Brain, Humans, Image Enhancement, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Sensitivity and Specificity, Subtraction Technique, Reproducibility of Results, Information Storage and Retrieval
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review