Cited by 215Medical Image Segmentation Techniques3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisMedical Imaging and Analysis

Hierarchical active shape models, using the wavelet transform

Davatzikos, C., Xiaodong Tao, Dinggang Shen·2003·IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging

Abstract

Active shape models (ASMs) are often limited by the inability of relatively few eigenvectors to capture the full range of biological shape variability. This paper presents a method that overcomes this limitation, by using a hierarchical formulation of active shape models, using the wavelet transform. The statistical properties of the wavelet transform of a deformable contour are analyzed via principal component analysis, and used as priors in the contour's deformation. Some of these priors reflect relatively global shape characteristics of the object boundaries, whereas, some of them capture local and high-frequency shape characteristics and, thus, serve as local smoothness constraints. This formulation achieves two objectives. First, it is robust when only a limited number of training samples is available. Second, by using local statistics as smoothness constraints, it eliminates the need for adopting ad hoc physical models, such as elasticity or other smoothness models, which do not necessarily reflect true biological variability. Examples on magnetic resonance images of the corpus callosum and hand contours demonstrate that good and fully automated segmentations can be achieved, even with as few as five training samples.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tmi.2003.809688

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davatzikos, C., Tao, X., & Shen, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
Published
2003-03
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
414-423
ISSN
0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2142152601
Cited by
215
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 11
FWCI
14.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R01AG014971, R01 AG14971-03)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Medical Imaging and Analysis
Keywords
active shape model, wavelet transform, deformable contours, shape variation, smoothness constraint, local statistics, shape priors, automatic segmentation, corpus callosum segmentation, magnetic resonance imaging, limited training data
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Corpus Callosum, Elasticity, Hand, Humans, Image Enhancement, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Motion, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Anatomy, Cross-Sectional

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