Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 407

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 access
Ou, Yangming, Sotiras, Aristeidis, Paragios, Nikos, Davatzikos, Christos·2011·Medical Image Analysis

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.media.2010.07.002

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 407

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.