The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Statistical approach to segmentation of single-channel cerebral MR images
Abstract
A statistical model is presented that represents the distributions of major tissue classes in single-channel magnetic resonance (MR) cerebral images. Using the model, cerebral images are segmented into gray matter, white matter, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). The model accounts for random noise, magnetic field inhomogeneities, and biological variations of the tissues. Intensity measurements are modeled by a finite Gaussian mixture. Smoothness and piecewise contiguous nature of the tissue regions are modeled by a three-dimensional (3-D) Markov random field (MRF). A segmentation algorithm, based on the statistical model, approximately finds the maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimation of the segmentation and estimates the model parameters from the image data. The proposed scheme for segmentation is based on the iterative conditional modes (ICM) algorithm in which measurement model parameters are estimated using local information at each site, and the prior model parameters are estimated using the segmentation after each cycle of iterations. Application of the algorithm to a sample of clinical MR brain scans, comparisons of the algorithm with other statistical methods, and a validation study with a phantom are presented. The algorithm constitutes a significant step toward a complete data driven unsupervised approach to segmentation of MR images in the presence of the random noise and intensity inhomogeneities.
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
Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data Via the EM Algorithm
Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1977.tb01600.x · Cited by 50,444
Cited by
Brain development in children and adolescents: Insights from anatomical magnetic resonance imaging
Lenroot, R. K., & Giedd, J. N. (2006) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2006.06.001 · Cited by 1,863
Self-citationPrefrontal atrophy, disrupted NREM slow waves and impaired hippocampal-dependent memory in aging
Mander, B. A., Rao, V., Lu, B., Saletin, J. M., Lindquist, J. R., Ancoli-Israel, S., Jagust, W., & Walker, M. P. (2013) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.3324 · Cited by 606
Bilingualism Tunes the Anterior Cingulate Cortex for Conflict Monitoring
Abutalebi, J., Della Rosa, P. A., Green, D. W., Hernandez, M., Scifo, P., Keim, R., Cappa, S. F., & Costa, A. (2012) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhr287 · Cited by 580
Developmental cognitive neuroscience using latent change score models: A tutorial and applications
Kievit, R. A., Brandmaier, A. M., Ziegler, G., van Harmelen, A.-L., de Mooij, S. M. M., Moutoussis, M., Goodyer, I. M., Bullmore, E., Jones, P. B., Fonagy, P., et al. (2018) · Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2017.11.007 · Cited by 516
Old brains come uncoupled in sleep: slow wave-spindle synchrony, brain atrophy, and forgetting
Helfrich, R. F., Mander, B. A., Jagust, W. J., Knight, R. T., & Walker, M. P. (2018) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2017.11.020 · Cited by 497
Metadata
- Authors
- Rajapakse, J. C., Giedd, J. N., & Rapoport, J. L.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
- Published
- 1997-04
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 176-186
- ISSN
- 0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2159965356
- Cited by
- 678
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.