PreprintCited by 55Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesMedical Imaging and AnalysisBrain Tumor Detection and Classification

Incorporating prior knowledge in medical image segmentation: a survey

Open access
Nosrati, Masoud S., Hamarneh, Ghassan·2016·arXiv

Abstract

Medical image segmentation, the task of partitioning an image into meaningful parts, is an important step toward automating medical image analysis and is at the crux of a variety of medical imaging applications, such as computer aided diagnosis, therapy planning and delivery, and computer aided interventions. However, the existence of noise, low contrast and objects' complexity in medical images are critical obstacles that stand in the way of achieving an ideal segmentation system. Incorporating prior knowledge into image segmentation algorithms has proven useful for obtaining more accurate and plausible results. This paper surveys the different types of prior knowledge that have been utilized in different segmentation frameworks. We focus our survey on optimization-based methods that incorporate prior information into their frameworks. We review and compare these methods in terms of the types of prior employed, the domain of formulation (continuous vs. discrete), and the optimization techniques (global vs. local). We also created an interactive online database of existing works and categorized them based on the type of prior knowledge they use. Our website is interactive so that researchers can contribute to keep the database up to date. We conclude the survey by discussing different aspects of designing an energy functional for image segmentation, open problems, and future perspectives.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1607.01092

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nosrati, M. S., & Hamarneh, G.
Affiliations
Simon Fraser University (CA)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2016
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2470417264
Cited by
55
References
56
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Medical Imaging and Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
Keywords
medical image segmentation, prior knowledge, energy functional, computer-aided diagnosis

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