Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 329

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Estimating the bias field of MR images

Guillemaud, R., Brady, M.·1997·IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging

Abstract

We propose a modification of Wells et al. technique for bias field estimation and segmentation of magnetic resonance (MR) images. We show that replacing the class other, which includes all tissue not modeled explicitly by Gaussians with small variance, by a uniform probability density, and amending the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm appropriately, gives significantly better results. We next consider the estimation and filtering of high-frequency information in MR images, comprising noise, intertissue boundaries, and within tissue microstructures. We conclude that post-filtering is preferable to the prefiltering that has been proposed previously. We observe that the performance of any segmentation algorithm, in particular that of Wells et al. (and our refinements of it) is affected substantially by the number and selection of the tissue classes that are modeled explicitly, the corresponding defining parameters and, critically, the spatial distribution of tissues in the image. We present an initial exploration to choose automatically the number of classes and the associated parameters that give the best output. This requires us to define what is meant by "best output" and for this we propose the application of minimum entropy. The methods developed have been implemented and are illustrated throughout on simulated and real data (brain and breast MR).

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 · 10.1109/42.585758

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Guillemaud, R., & Brady, M.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
Published
1997-06
Volume
16
Issue
3
Pages
238-251
ISSN
0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2022495783
Cited by
329
References
1
FWCI
11.16
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.