Segmentation of Stochastic Images using ... - Jacobs University
Segmentation of Stochastic Images using ... - Jacobs University
Segmentation of Stochastic Images using ... - Jacobs University
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Chapter 8 <strong>Segmentation</strong> <strong>of</strong> Classical <strong>Images</strong> Using <strong>Stochastic</strong> Parameters<br />
Figure 8.8: Result <strong>of</strong> the geodesic active contour segmentation with stochastic parameters for the<br />
liver data set. On the left the expected value <strong>of</strong> a detail <strong>of</strong> the image and contour realizations<br />
and on the right the variance <strong>of</strong> the level set with contour realizations are shown.<br />
regions, where the object to segment does not have the “elliptic” contour behavior. In these regions,<br />
the gradient differs from the remaining parts <strong>of</strong> the image. The geodesic active contour method has<br />
different attractors depending on the particular value <strong>of</strong> α and β in these regions. This is visible<br />
from Fig. 8.7, because the contour realizations are far from each other, and the variance is high in a<br />
region in the upper part <strong>of</strong> the object boundary.<br />
Remark 19. Note that for level sets there is, in contrast to the random walker method, a one-to-one<br />
correspondence between the distance between the contour realizations and the variance, because we<br />
use a stochastic equivalent <strong>of</strong> the signed distance function. Thus, deviations in the level set position<br />
are related to the variance directly.<br />
For the liver data set, Fig. 8.8 shows the results with the same stochastic parameters. Again, the<br />
results are close together for parameter realizations, because we have one attractor for the level set<br />
only (the object boundary). The differences in the lower part <strong>of</strong> the object are due to the weak<br />
attraction <strong>of</strong> the liver boundary for some realizations <strong>of</strong> the parameter α.<br />
Conclusion<br />
The presented sensitivity analysis is a natural extension <strong>of</strong> the stochastic image processing framework<br />
presented in this thesis. With the sensitivity analysis, we investigate the robustness <strong>of</strong> the<br />
classical image segmentation methods with respect to parameter changes. This additional stochastic<br />
information is available for the costs <strong>of</strong> a few Monte Carlo runs. However, we do not use the Monte<br />
Carlo method, but have to solve a couple <strong>of</strong> deterministic problems when <strong>using</strong> the GSD method.<br />
A possible application <strong>of</strong> this kind <strong>of</strong> sensitivity analysis is to warn the user, when the segmentation<br />
result is sensitive to parameter changes. This can be done via background calculations, i.e. the system<br />
computes the stochastic solution while the user examines the deterministic result. When necessary,<br />
the system informs the user about the stochastic result and makes additional information like the<br />
variance or contour realizations available.<br />
106