The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Survey: interpolation methods in medical image processing
Abstract
Image interpolation techniques often are required in medical imaging for image generation (e.g., discrete back projection for inverse Radon transform) and processing such as compression or resampling. Since the ideal interpolation function spatially is unlimited, several interpolation kernels of finite size have been introduced. This paper compares 1) truncated and windowed sinc; 2) nearest neighbor; 3) linear; 4) quadratic; 5) cubic B-spline; 6) cubic; g) Lagrange; and 7) Gaussian interpolation and approximation techniques with kernel sizes from 1 x 1 up to 8 x 8. The comparison is done by: 1) spatial and Fourier analyses; 2) computational complexity as well as runtime evaluations; and 3) qualitative and quantitative interpolation error determinations for particular interpolation tasks which were taken from common situations in medical image processing. For local and Fourier analyses, a standardized notation is introduced and fundamental properties of interpolators are derived. Successful methods should be direct current (DC)-constant and interpolators rather than DC-inconstant or approximators. Each method's parameters are tuned with respect to those properties. This results in three novel kernels, which are introduced in this paper and proven to be within the best choices for medical image interpolation: the 6 x 6 Blackman-Harris windowed sinc interpolator, and the C2-continuous cubic kernels with N = 6 and N = 8 supporting points. For quantitative error evaluations, a set of 50 direct digital X rays was used. They have been selected arbitrarily from clinical routine. In general, large kernel sizes were found to be superior to small interpolation masks. Except for truncated sinc interpolators, all kernels with N = 6 or larger sizes perform significantly better than N = 2 or N = 3 point methods (p << 0.005). However, the differences within the group of large-sized kernels were not significant. Summarizing the results, the cubic 6 x 6 interpolator with continuous second derivatives, as defined in (24), can be recommended for most common interpolation tasks. It appears to be the fastest six-point kernel to implement computationally. It provides eminent local and Fourier properties, is easy to implement, and has only small errors. The same characteristics apply to B-spline interpolation, but the 6 x 6 cubic avoids the intrinsic border effects produced by the B-spline technique. However, the goal of this study was not to determine an overall best method, but to present a comprehensive catalogue of methods in a uniform terminology, to define general properties and requirements of local techniques, and to enable the reader to select that method which is optimal for his specific application in medical imaging.
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
Cited by
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
Hill, D. L. G., Batchelor, P. G., Holden, M., & Hawkes, D. J. (2001) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/46/3/201 · Cited by 2,093
An edge-guided image interpolation algorithm via directional filtering and data fusion
Zhang, L., & Wu, X. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2006.877407 · Cited by 1,020
A Survey of Medical Image Registration on Multicore and the GPU
Shams, R., Sadeghi, P., Kennedy, R., & Hartley, R. (2010) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2009.935387 · Cited by 198
Evaluating fMRI preprocessing pipelines
Strother, S. C. (2006) · IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine · doi:10.1109/memb.2006.1607667 · Cited by 169
Metadata
- Authors
- Lehmann, T. M., Gonner, C., & Spitzer, K.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
- Published
- 1999
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1049-1075
- ISSN
- 0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2113524221
- Cited by
- 1,340
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.40
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Survey: interpolation methods in medical image processing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/42.816070
- The paper
- Lehmann, T. M., Gonner, C., & Spitzer, K. (1999). Survey: interpolation methods in medical image processing. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.816070
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.