Cargando…

“Nonparametric Local Smoothing” is not image registration

BACKGROUND: Image registration is one of the most important and universally useful computational tasks in biomedical image analysis. A recent article by Xing & Qiu (IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 33(10):2081–2092, 2011) is based on an inappropriately narrow conce...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rohlfing, Torsten, Avants, Brian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3740790/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23116330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-5-610
_version_ 1782280178496438272
author Rohlfing, Torsten
Avants, Brian
author_facet Rohlfing, Torsten
Avants, Brian
author_sort Rohlfing, Torsten
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Image registration is one of the most important and universally useful computational tasks in biomedical image analysis. A recent article by Xing & Qiu (IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 33(10):2081–2092, 2011) is based on an inappropriately narrow conceptualization of the image registration problem as the task of making two images look alike, which disregards whether the established spatial correspondence is plausible. The authors propose a new algorithm, Nonparametric Local Smoothing (NLS) for image registration, but use image similarities alone as a measure of registration performance, although these measures do not relate reliably to the realism of the correspondence map. RESULTS: Using data obtained from its authors, we show experimentally that the method proposed by Xing & Qiu is not an effective registration algorithm. While it optimizes image similarity, it does not compute accurate, interpretable transformations. Even judged by image similarity alone, the proposed method is consistently outperformed by a simple pixel permutation algorithm, which is known by design not to compute valid registrations. CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated that the NLS algorithm proposed recently for image registration, and published in one of the most respected journals in computer science, is not, in fact, an effective registration method at all. Our results also emphasize the general need to apply registration evaluation criteria that are sensitive to whether correspondences are accurate and mappings between images are physically interpretable. These goals cannot be achieved by simply reporting image similarities.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3740790
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37407902013-08-13 “Nonparametric Local Smoothing” is not image registration Rohlfing, Torsten Avants, Brian BMC Res Notes Correspondence BACKGROUND: Image registration is one of the most important and universally useful computational tasks in biomedical image analysis. A recent article by Xing & Qiu (IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 33(10):2081–2092, 2011) is based on an inappropriately narrow conceptualization of the image registration problem as the task of making two images look alike, which disregards whether the established spatial correspondence is plausible. The authors propose a new algorithm, Nonparametric Local Smoothing (NLS) for image registration, but use image similarities alone as a measure of registration performance, although these measures do not relate reliably to the realism of the correspondence map. RESULTS: Using data obtained from its authors, we show experimentally that the method proposed by Xing & Qiu is not an effective registration algorithm. While it optimizes image similarity, it does not compute accurate, interpretable transformations. Even judged by image similarity alone, the proposed method is consistently outperformed by a simple pixel permutation algorithm, which is known by design not to compute valid registrations. CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated that the NLS algorithm proposed recently for image registration, and published in one of the most respected journals in computer science, is not, in fact, an effective registration method at all. Our results also emphasize the general need to apply registration evaluation criteria that are sensitive to whether correspondences are accurate and mappings between images are physically interpretable. These goals cannot be achieved by simply reporting image similarities. BioMed Central 2012-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC3740790/ /pubmed/23116330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-5-610 Text en Copyright © 2012 Rohlfing and Avants; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Correspondence
Rohlfing, Torsten
Avants, Brian
“Nonparametric Local Smoothing” is not image registration
title “Nonparametric Local Smoothing” is not image registration
title_full “Nonparametric Local Smoothing” is not image registration
title_fullStr “Nonparametric Local Smoothing” is not image registration
title_full_unstemmed “Nonparametric Local Smoothing” is not image registration
title_short “Nonparametric Local Smoothing” is not image registration
title_sort “nonparametric local smoothing” is not image registration
topic Correspondence
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3740790/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23116330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-5-610
work_keys_str_mv AT rohlfingtorsten nonparametriclocalsmoothingisnotimageregistration
AT avantsbrian nonparametriclocalsmoothingisnotimageregistration