Fractal Analysis of Mammograms

  • Fredrik Georgsson
  • Stefan Jansson
  • Christina Olsén
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4522)


In this paper it is shown that there is a difference in local fractal dimension between imaged glandular tissue, supporting tissue and muscle tissue based on an assessment from a mammogram. By estimating the density difference at four different local dimensions (2.06, 2.33, 2.48, 2.70) from 142 mammograms we can define a measure and by using this measure we are able to distinguish between the tissue types. A ROC-analysis gives us an area under the curve-value of 0.9998 for separating glandular tissue from muscular tissue and 0.9405 for separating glandular tissue from supporting tissue. To some extent we can say that the measured difference in fractal properties is due to different fractal properties of the unprojected tissue. For example, to a large extent muscle tissue seems to have different fractal properties than glandular or supportive tissue. However, a large variance in the local dimension densities makes it difficult to make proper use of the proposed measure for segmentation purposes.


Fractal Dimension Local Dimension Fractal Analysis Domain Expert Fractal Geometry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Caldwell, C.B., Stapleton, S.J., Holdsworth, D.W., Jong, R.A., Weiser, W.J., Cooke, G., Yaffe, M.J.: Characterization of mammographic parenchymal pattern by fractal dimensions. Physics in Medicine and Biology 35, 235–247 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baish, J.W., Jain, R.: Fractals and cancer. Cancer Research 60, 3683–3688 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Veenland, J., Grashuis, J.L., van der Meer, F., Beckers, A.L.D., Gelsema, E.S.: Estimation of fractal dimension in radiographs. Medical Physics 23, 585–594 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Huang, Q., Lorch, J., Dubes, R.: Can the fractal dimension of images be measured. Pattern Recognition 27, 339–349 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jelink, H., Fernandez, E.: Neorons and fractals: how reliable and useful are calculations of fractal dimensions? Journal of Neoroscience Methods 81, 9–18 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nilsson, A., Georgsson, F.: Projective properties of fractal sets. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, Accepted for publication (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wolfe, J.N.: Risk for breast cancer development determined by mammograhic parenchymal pattern. Cancer 37, 2486–2492 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chung, H.W., Chung, H.J.: Letter to the editor; correspondence re: J. W. Baish and R. K. Jain, Fractals and Cancer. Cancer Res. Cancer Res. 61, 8347–8348 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee, W.L., Chen, Y.C., Chen, Y.C., Hsieh, K.S.: Unsupervised segmentation of ultrasonic liver images by multiresolution fractal feature vectors. Information Sciences 175, 177–199 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen, C., Daponte, J., Fox, M.: Fractal feature analysis and classification in medical imaging. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 8(30), 133–142 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Falconer, K.: Fractal Geometry. Wiley, Chichester (1990)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jansson, S., Georgsson, F.: Evaluation of methods for estimating the fractal dimension of intensity images. In: Georgsson, F., Börlin, N. (eds.) Proceedings of SSBA. Number UMINF-06.11, pp. 69–72. Swedish Society for Automated Image Analysis (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jansson, S.: Evaluation of methods for estimating fractal properties of intensity images. Umnad: 699/06, Dept. of Comp. Sc. Umeå University (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Keller, J., Chen, S., Crownover, R.: Texture description and segmentation through fractal geometry. Computer Vision, Graphics, and image processing 45, 150–166 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Georgsson, F.: Fractal dimensions and the geometry of x-ray imaging. In: Bengtsson, E. (ed.) Proccedings of SSBA 2004, pp. 150–153 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Peitgen, H.O., Saupe, D. (eds.): The Science of Fractal Images. Springer, Berlin (1988)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fredrik Georgsson
    • 1
  • Stefan Jansson
    • 1
  • Christina Olsén
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computing Science, Umeå University, SE-901 87 UmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations