| Literature DB >> 32726324 |
Roman Shkarin1,2, Svetlana Shkarina3,4, Venera Weinhardt1,4,5, Roman A Surmenev3, Maria A Surmeneva3, Andrei Shkarin1, Tilo Baumbach1,4, Ralf Mikut2.
Abstract
Orientation analysis of fibers is widely applied in the fields of medical, material and life sciences. The orientation information allows predicting properties and behavior of materials to validate and guide a fabrication process of materials with controlled fiber orientation. Meanwhile, development of detector systems for high-resolution non-invasive 3D imaging techniques led to a significant increase in the amount of generated data per a sample up to dozens of gigabytes. Though plenty of 3D orientation estimation algorithms were developed in recent years, neither of them can process large datasets in a reasonable amount of time. This fact complicates the further analysis and makes impossible fast feedback to adjust fabrication parameters. In this work, we present a new method for quantifying the 3D orientation of fibers. The GPU implementation of the proposed method surpasses another popular method for 3D orientation analysis regarding accuracy and speed. The validation of both methods was performed on a synthetic dataset with varying parameters of fibers. Moreover, the proposed method was applied to perform orientation analysis of scaffolds with different fibrous micro-architecture studied with the synchrotron μCT imaging setup. Each acquired dataset of size 600x600x450 voxels was analyzed in less 2 minutes using standard PC equipped with a single GPU.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32726324 PMCID: PMC7390437 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236420
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1The representation of a fiber in the spherical coordinate system with the rays casted from the origin.
Fig 2Alg 1—The pseudo-code of the ray-casting method.
Fig 3Alg 2—The pseudo-code of the tensor-based approach.
Fig 4The synthetic dataset (a) with noised slices extracted from the central XY-plane of the contaminated dataset (b-g) (marked with the blue dashed line).
Fig 5The comparative accuracy analysis of the tensor-based approach (left) and the proposed method (right): a,b) the absolute error of orientation quantification of the noiseless dataset to determine the optimal window size; c,d) the evaluation of the sum of absolute errors to spot error-prone regions on the noiseless dataset; e,f) the behavior of the absolute error while increasing σagn for the dataset and keeping a window size of 33 pixels.
The absolute error of methods and the absolute error differences between the tensor-based and the ray-casting approach estimated for the synthetic dataset contaminated with varying σagn.
| σagn | Ray-casting approach | Tensor-based approach | Difference of Tensor-based from Ray-casting approach | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Azimuth [deg.] | Elevation [deg.] | Azimuth [deg.] | Elevation [deg.] | Azimuth [deg.] | Elevation [deg.] | |
| 5.11 | 2.41 | 11.95 | 7.59 | 6.84 | 5.18 | |
| 17.05 | 15.01 | 22.55 | 18.59 | 5.5 | 3.58 | |
| 21.71 | 20.39 | 25.84 | 23.30 | 4.13 | 2.91 | |
| 27.11 | 26.18 | 32.25 | 28.91 | 5.14 | 2.73 | |
| 33.67 | 32.96 | 43.91 | 39.86 | 10.24 | 6.9 | |
This validation procedure has shown that the proposed method provides higher accuracy than the tensor-based approach for the same dataset over different validation scenarios.
Fig 6The throughput evaluation of the proposed method and the tensor-based approach over different data sizes for various computation environments.
The results of throughput evaluation of the proposed method and the tensor-based approach for various data sizes and computation environments.
| Data size (pixels) | Ray-casting approach (MB/s) | Tensor-based approach (MB/s) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPU | CPU x8 | CPU x16 | GPU | CPU x8 | CPU x16 | |
| 227.03 | 18.33 | 35.41 | 11.90 | 1.47 | 1.68 | |
| 304.18 | 38.26 | 39.25 | 10.25 | 1.84 | 2.05 | |
| 192.66 | 37.34 | 43.92 | 11.07 | 1.80 | 2.07 | |
Fig 7The 3D orientation analysis results produced by the proposed algorithm for estimating orientation on the datasets of PCL scaffolds acquired at the synchrotron-based μCT imaging setup: a,b) the 3D visualization of the color-coded fiber orientation datasets of the scaffolds with well-aligned and randomly oriented structure; c,d) the azimuthal orientation histograms; e,f) the elevation orientation histograms of fibers for well-aligned and randomly oriented cases.