4.7 Article

Highly accurate inverse consistent registration: A robust approach

Journal

NEUROIMAGE
Volume 53, Issue 4, Pages 1181-1196

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.07.020

Keywords

Image registration; Robust statistics; Inverse consistent alignment; Motion correction; Longitudinal analysis

Funding

  1. National Center for Research Resources [P41-RR14075, BIRN002, U24 RR021382]
  2. National Institute for Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering [R01 EB006758]
  3. National Institute on Aging [R01 AG022381, U54 AG024904]
  4. National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke [R01 NS052585-01, R01 NS042861, P01 NS058793]
  5. Ellison Medical Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The registration of images is a task that is at the core of many applications in computer vision. In computational neuroimaging where the automated segmentation of brain structures is frequently used to quantify change, a highly accurate registration is necessary for motion correction of images taken in the same session, or across time in longitudinal studies where changes in the images can be expected. This paper, inspired by Nestares and Heeger (2000), presents a method based on robust statistics to register images in the presence of differences, such as jaw movement, differential MR distortions and true anatomical change. The approach we present guarantees inverse consistency (symmetry), can deal with different intensity scales and automatically estimates a sensitivity parameter to detect outlier regions in the images. The resulting registrations are highly accurate due to their ability to ignore outlier regions and show superior robustness with respect to noise, to intensity scaling and outliers when compared to state-of-the-art registration tools such as FLIRT (in FSL) or the coregistration tool in SPM. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available