Perceptual Distance Functions for Similarity Retrieval of Medical Images

  • Joaquim Cezar Felipe
  • Agma Juci Machado Traina
  • Caetano TrainaJr
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4071)


A challenge already opened for a long time concerning Content-based Image Retrieval (CBIR) systems is how to define a suitable distance function to measure the similarity between images regarding an application context, which complies with the human specialist perception of similarity. In this paper, we present a new family of distance functions, namely, Attribute Interaction Influence Distances (AID), aiming at retrieving images by similarity. Such measures address an important aspect of psychophysical comparison between images: the effect in the interaction on the variations of the image features. The AID functions allow comparing feature vectors using two parameterized expressions: one targeting weak feature interaction; and another for strong interaction. This paper also presents experimental results with medical images, showing that when the reference is the radiologist perception, AID works better than the distance functions most commonly used in CBIR.


Feature Vector Distance Function Medical Image Image Retrieval Attribute Interaction 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Vailaya, A., et al.: Image Classification for Content-based Indexing. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 10(1), 117–130 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rubner, Y., Tomasi, C.: Perceptual Metrics for Image Database Navigation. The Kluwer Intl. Series in Eng. and Computer Science, p. 137. Kluwer Academic Pub., Boston (2001)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Akleman, E., Chen, J.: Generalized Distance Functions. In: Intl. Conf. on Shape Modeling and Applications. Aizu-Wakamatsu (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Theodoridis, S., Koutroumbas, K.: Pattern Recognition, p. 625. Acad. Press, N. York (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vasconcelos, N., Lippman, A.: A Unifying View of Image Similarity. In: Intl. Conf. on Pattern Recognition (ICPR) (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gibbs, A.L., Su, F.E.: On Choosing and Bounding Probability Metrics. International Statistical Review 70(3), 419–435 (2002)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang, D.S., Lu, G.: Evaluation of Similarity Measurement For Image Retrieval. In: IEEE Int. Conf. on Neural Networks & Signal Processing, Nanjing, China, pp. 928–931 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wilson, D.R., Martinez, T.R.: Improved Heterogeneous Distance Functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6, 1–34 (1997)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tversky, A.: Features of Similarity. Psychological Review 84(4), 327–352 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tversky, A., Gati, I.: Similarity, Separability and the Triangle Inequality. Psychological Review 89(1), 123–154 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chang, E.Y., Li, B., Li, C.: Toward Preception-Based Image Retrieval. In: IEEE Workshop on Content-Based Access of Image and Video Libraries, Hilton Head, pp. 101–105 (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haralick, R.M., Shanmugan, K., Dinstein, I.: Textural Fetures for Image Classification. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 3(6), 610–621 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joaquim Cezar Felipe
    • 1
  • Agma Juci Machado Traina
    • 2
  • Caetano TrainaJr
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Physics and MathematicsUniversity of São Paulo at Ribeirão Preto 
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of São Paulo at São CarlosBrazil

Personalised recommendations