1 / 1

Comparing Fuzzy Clustering and Finite Gaussian Mixture Model in Brain MRI Jose M. Casillas Diaz

Comparing Fuzzy Clustering and Finite Gaussian Mixture Model in Brain MRI Jose M. Casillas Diaz. Fuzzy Clustering and FGMM Segmentation Segmentation separates the MR images into its component tissue types. The one we are interested in are: White matter (WM) Grey Matter (GM)

candy
Télécharger la présentation

Comparing Fuzzy Clustering and Finite Gaussian Mixture Model in Brain MRI Jose M. Casillas Diaz

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Comparing Fuzzy Clustering and Finite Gaussian Mixture Model in Brain MRI Jose M. Casillas Diaz • Fuzzy Clustering and FGMM Segmentation • Segmentation separates the MR images into its component tissue types. The one we are interested in are: • White matter (WM) • Grey Matter (GM) • Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) • Introduction • At this time, there are many algorithms for the segmentation of magnetic resonance (MR) images. Fuzzy Clustering and Finite Gaussian Mixture Model (FGMM) are two of them. In this project, we are comparing the accuracy and the precision of the segmentation of the two algorithms. • Magnetic Resonance Imaging • A image technique used to produce high quality cross-sectional images of the internal human body. In this case, the brain. • Uses magnetization and radio waves. • Volumes have magnetization strength of 1.5T and 3T • Each Slice has a thickness of 1mm to 3mm. • Slices can have a size of 512 x 512 or 256 x 256 voxels Methodology By comparing the segmented images with his ground truth (image analyzed by a doctor or expert on the field), we have obtained the confusion matrix which summarizes the results of the classification. (a) (b) (c) • Conclusions • The fuzzy clustering successfully segmented 1.5T and 3T data. • The FGMM have problems segmenting 1.5T data and lower slices that contain the eyes. • The FGMM had better results detectingCSF in some 3T volumes. • Figure 2. Fuzzy clustering segmentation • (a) CSF (b) WM (c) GM (a) (b) (c) • Figure 3. Finite Gaussian segmentation • (a) CSF (b) WM (c) GM Acknowledgements Stacey Franco, Yuhua Gu, Dr. Dmitry Goldgof Figure 1.Axial cross-sectional T1,cerebrospinal fluid and T2 weighted MRI of the brain Department of Computer Science & Engineering

More Related