The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
DRAMMS: Deformable registration via attribute matching and mutual-saliency weighting
Open accessAbstract
A general-purpose deformable registration algorithm referred to as “DRAMMS” is presented in this paper. DRAMMS bridges the gap between the traditional voxel-wise methods and landmark/feature-based methods with primarily two contributions. First, DRAMMS renders each voxel relatively distinctively identifiable by a rich set of attributes, therefore largely reducing matching ambiguities. In particular, a set of multi-scale and multi-orientation Gabor attributes are extracted and the optimal components are selected, so that they form a highly distinctive morphological signature reflecting the anatomical and geometric context around each voxel. Moreover, the way in which the optimal Gabor attributes are constructed is independent from the underlying image modalities or contents, which renders DRAMMS generally applicable to diverse registration tasks. A second contribution of DRAMMS is that it modulates the registration by assigning higher weights to those voxels having higher ability to establish unique (hence reliable) correspondences across images, therefore reducing the negative impact of those regions that are less capable of finding correspondences. A continuously-valued weighting function named “mutual-saliency” is developed to reflect the matching reliability between a pair of voxels implied by the tentative transformation. As a result, voxels do not contribute equally as in most voxel-wise methods, nor in isolation as in landmark/feature-based methods. Instead, they contribute according to the continuously-valued mutual-saliency map, which dynamically evolves during the registration process. Experiments in simulated images, inter-subject images, single-/multi-modality images, from brain, heart, and prostate have demonstrated the general applicability and the accuracy of DRAMMS.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A fast diffeomorphic image registration algorithm
Ashburner, J. (2007) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.07.007 · Cited by 8,122
Image registration methods: a survey
Zitová, B., & Flusser, J. (2003) · Image and Vision Computing · doi:10.1016/s0262-8856(03)00137-9 · Cited by 6,423
Nonrigid registration using free-form deformations: application to breast mr images
Rueckert, D., Sonoda, L. I., Hayes, C., Hill, D. L. G., Leach, M. O., & Hawkes, D. J. (1999) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/42.796284 · Cited by 5,265
A Voxel-Based Morphometric Study of Ageing in 465 Normal Adult Human Brains
Good, C. D., Johnsrude, I. S., Ashburner, J., Henson, R. N. A., Friston, K. J., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (2001) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.0786 · Cited by 4,561
Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information
Maes, F., Collignon, A., Vandermeulen, D., Marchal, G., & Suetens, P. (1997) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/42.563664 · Cited by 4,547
Automatic 3D intersubject registration of MR volumetric data in standardized Talairach space
Collins, D. L., Neelin, P., Peters, T. M., & Evans, A. C. (1994) · Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography · doi:10.1097/00004728-199403000-00005 · Cited by 3,431 · cited 1×
“…include (Glocker et al., 2008; Vercauteren et al., 2007, 2009; Ou and Davatzikos, 2009; D’Agostino et al., 2003; Kybic and Unser, 2003; Christensen et al., 1994; Collins et al., 1994; Thirion, 1998; Rueckert et al., 1999; Maes et al., 1997; Wells et al., 1996; Friston et al., 1995), among others.”
BackgroundImage matching as a diffusion process: an analogy with maxwell’s demons
Thirion, J.-P. (1998) · Medical Image Analysis · doi:10.1016/s1361-8415(98)80022-4 · Cited by 2,445
A new point matching algorithm for non-rigid registration
Chui, H., & Rangarajan, A. (2003) · Computer Vision and Image Understanding · doi:10.1016/s1077-3142(03)00009-2 · Cited by 1,560
Cited by
Deep learning in medical image analysis
Shen, D., Wu, G., & Suk, H.-I. (2017) · Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071516-044442 · Cited by 4,968
Deformable medical image registration: a survey
Sotiras, A., Davatzikos, C., & Paragios, N. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2013.2265603 · Cited by 1,587
Self-citationHarmonization of multi-site diffusion tensor imaging data
Fortin, J.-P., Parker, D., Tunç, B., Watanabe, T., Elliott, M. A., Ruparel, K., Roalf, D. R., Satterthwaite, T. D., Gur, R. C., Gur, R. E., et al. (2017) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.08.047 · Cited by 1,261
Evaluation of prostate segmentation algorithms for mri: The promise12 challenge
Litjens, G., Toth, R., van de Ven, W., Hoeks, C., Kerkstra, S., van Ginneken, B., Vincent, G., Guillard, G., Birbeck, N., Zhang, J., et al. (2014) · Medical Image Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.media.2013.12.002 · Cited by 857
Self-citationMSM: a new flexible framework for Multimodal Surface Matching
Robinson, E. C., Jbabdi, S., Glasser, M. F., Andersson, J., Burgess, G. C., Harms, M. P., Smith, S. M., Van Essen, D. C., & Jenkinson, M. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.069 · Cited by 640
Metadata
- Authors
- Ou, Y., Sotiras, A., Paragios, N., & Davatzikos, C.
- Venue
- Medical Image Analysis
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-08
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 622-639
- ISSN
- 1361-8415 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1980114101
- Cited by
- 407
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 16.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: DRAMMS: Deformable registration via attribute matching and mutual-saliency weighting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.media.2010.07.002
- The paper
- Ou, Y., Sotiras, A., Paragios, N., & Davatzikos, C. (2011). DRAMMS: Deformable registration via attribute matching and mutual-saliency weighting. Medical Image Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2010.07.002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.