4.7 Article

Constrained Gaussian mixture model framework for automatic segmentation of MR brain images

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING
Volume 25, Issue 9, Pages 1233-1245

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2006.880668

Keywords

constrained model; expectation-maximization (EM); Gaussian mixture model (GMM); image segmentation; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain segmentation; mixture of Gaussians

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An automated algorithm for tissue segmentation of noisy, low-contrast magnetic resonance (MR) images of the brain is presented. A mixture model composed of a large number of Gaussians is used to represent the brain image. Each tissue is represented by a large number of Gaussian components to capture the complex tissue spatial layout. The intensity of a tissue is considered a global feature and is incorporated into the model through tying of all the related Gaussian parameters. The expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm is utilized to learn the parameter-tied, constrained Gaussian mixture model. An elaborate initialization scheme is suggested to link the set of Gaussians per tissue type, such that each Gaussian in the set has similar intensity characteristics with minimal overlapping spatial supports. Segmentation of the brain image is achieved by the affiliation of each voxel to the component of the model that maximized the a posteriori probability. The presented algorithm is used to segment three-dimensional, T1-weighted, simulated and real MR images of the brain into three different tissues, under varying noise conditions. Results are compared with state-of-the-art algorithms in the literature. The algorithm does not use an atlas for initialization or parameter learning. Registration processes are therefore not required and the applicability of the framework can be extended to diseased brains and neonatal brains.

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