| Literature DB >> 25884695 |
Geming Wu1, Xinyan Zhao2, Shuqian Luo3, Hongli Shi4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colour image segmentation is fundamental and critical for quantitative histological image analysis. The complexity of the microstructure and the approach to make histological images results in variable staining and illumination variations. And ultra-high resolution of histological images makes it is hard for image segmentation methods to achieve high-quality segmentation results and low computation cost at the same time.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25884695 PMCID: PMC4380112 DOI: 10.1186/s12938-015-0020-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Eng Online ISSN: 1475-925X Impact factor: 2.819
Figure 1The relationship of and in two dimension case. Black points represent observations. The region R is split into tiny squares which are used to represent the observations located in them.
Figure 2Integral image scheme used to speed up the computation of mean shift vector. The sum of elements within the region R can be simply computed by using four integral image values at its four corners.
Figure 3Original liver fibrosis histological images for performance evaluation. Twenty histological images obtained for performance evaluation by digitizing several sections from a liver histological specimen of a Wistar rat.
Figure 4Segmentation results of four liver fibrosis histological imageS by using k-Means, GMM-EM, HMRF-EM, KGC, Mean Shift, and FMShift. Four columns are corresponding to four histological images. Fibrosis, vessels and other tissues are represented in light blue, white and lavender respectively. From top to bottom are original histological images, manual segmentations, and segmentations using k-Means, GMM-EM, HMRF-EM, KGC, Mean Shift and the proposed FMShist method.
Comparison of segmentation accuracies
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| k-Means | 0.67 ± 0.24 | 0.52 ± 0.24 | 0.69 ± 0.08 | 1.25 ± 0.20 |
| GMM-EM | 0.60 ± 0.13 | 0.68 ± 0.22 | 0.76 ± 0.10 | 1.03 ± 0.29 |
| HMRF-EM | 0.28 ± 0.14 | 0.76 ± 0.22 | 0.62 ± 0.10 | 1.35 ± 0.24 |
| KGC | 0.23 ± 0.10 | 0.69 ± 0.19 | 0.55 ± 0.08 | 1.62 ± 0.16 |
| Mean Shift | 0.87 ± 0.05 | 0.84 ± 0.09 | 0.91 ± 0.03 | 0.53 ± 0.12 |
| FMShift | 0.86 ± 0.05 | 0.84 ± 0.07 | 0.91 ± 0.02 | 0.54 ± 0.12 |
Comparison of average computation times
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 4.2 | 117.0 | 954.2 | 14.8 | 732.3 | 6.6 |