Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Synthetic experiments setup and results.

From left to right: Source, target and pullback-registered CC-DIR images for Linear (Top row), Nonlinear (Center row) and Growth (Bottom row) case. The registered images show clear matching of the shapes IL and IR.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Intersection (IS) and DICE score for synthetic experiments.

The purposed CC-DIR based algorithm shows no overlap in the three test cases additionally with a superior DICE score.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Comparison of TREs for the DIR-LAB data set in mm.

The mean TRE of the purposed CC-DIR method ranks at fourth place out of seven with an offset of 0.15 mm to the best performing algorithm.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 2.

Overview of the reference, source and registered image.

|IJ| shows the intensity differences between moving and fixed image without registration, |I∘Φ − J| after collision-based registration. A clear reduction of intensity differences and matching of anatomical structures can be observed.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Close-up of the displacement field.

Displacements around the interface (green arrows) show observable sliding motion along the boundary (red).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 3.

Comparison of gap/overlap for the DIR-LAB data set by case.

The purposed CC-DIR algorithm shows the least overlap compared to the six other methods. It rates second in terms of interface gap with a mean offset of 38.1 cm3 to the first place. All measurements are in cm3.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Shear stretch evaluation.

High differences in shear stretches along lung-rib-cage interface with respect to the rest of the image are depicted.

More »

Fig 4 Expand