Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
In this later expression, the product corresponds to a Gaussian distribution with
3
3
3
q ( r )
T i
q ( r )
T i
q ( r )
T i
μ i
λ i
λ i
λ i
mean
( e k ).
It follows that step E-S can be seen as the E-step for a standard Hidden MRF
with class distributions defined by g S and an external field incorporating prior
structure knowledge through f . As already mentioned, it can be solved using
techniques such as those described in [16].
( e k ) /
( e k ) and precision
k =1
k =1
k =1
5.2 Updating the Tissue Intensity Distribution Parameters
As mentioned in Section 4.2, we now consider that the θ i 's are constant over
subvolumes of a given partition of the entire volume. The MRF prior on θ =
{
exp( H Θ ( θ )) and (5) can be written as,
θ c ,c
∈C}
is p ( θ )
p ( θ ) i∈V k =1 g T ( y i ; θ i ) a ik =
θ ( r +1) =argmax
θ∈Θ
p ( θ ) c∈C k =1 i∈V c g T ( y i ; θ c ) a ik , where a ik
= q ( r )
T i
( e k ) q ( r )
S i
( e L +1 )+
arg max
θ∈Θ
lst.T l = e k q ( r )
( e l ). The second term in a ik is the probability that voxel i belongs
to one of the structures made of tissue k .The a ik 's sum to one (over k )and a ik
can be interpreted as the probability for voxel i to belong to the tissue class k
when both tissue and structure segmentations information are combined. Using
the additional natural assumption that p ( θ )= K
S i
p ( θ k ), it is equivalent to
p ( θ k ) c∈C i∈V c g T ( y i ; θ c ) a ik .
However, when p ( θ k ) is chosen as a Markov field, the exact maximization (5.2)
is still intractable. We therefore replace p ( θ k ) by a product form given by its
modal-field approximation [16]. This is actually equivalent to use the ICM [17]
algorithm. Assuming a current estimation θ k ( ν ) of θ k at iteration ν ,weconsider
in turn,
k =1
solve for each k =1 ...K , θ k ( r +1) =arg max
θ k ∈Θ k
N ( c ) )
i∈V c
θ k ( ν )
k ( ν +1)
c
p ( θ c |
g T ( y i ; θ c ) a ik ,
c
∈C
,
=arg max
θ c ∈Θ k
(10)
where
( c ) denotes the indices of the subvolumes that are neighbors of subvol-
ume c and θ N ( c )
N
θ c ,c ∈N
=
{
( c )
}
. At convergence, the obtained values give
the updated estimation θ k ( r +1) .
The particular form (10) above guides the specification of the prior for θ .
Indeed, Bayesian analysis indicates that a natural choice for p ( θ c | θ k
( c ) )has
to be among conjugate or semi-conjugate priors for the Gaussian distribution
g T ( y i ; θ c ). We choose to consider here the latter case. In addition, we assume that
the Markovian dependence applies only to the mean parameters and consider
that p ( θ c |
N
θ N ( c ) )= p ( μ c |
μ k N ( c ) ) p ( λ c ) , with p ( μ c |
μ k N ( c ) ) set to a Gaussian
distribution with mean m c + c ∈N ( c ) η cc ( μ c
m c ) and precision λ 0 k
,and p ( λ c )
c
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search