Go Digital, Go Fuzzy

  • Jayaram K. Udupa
Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1953)

Abstract

In many application areas of imaging sciences, object information captured in multi-dimensional images needs to be extracted, visualized, manipulated, and analyzed. These four groups of operations have been (and are being) intensively investigated, developed, and applied in a variety of applications. In this paper, after giving a brief overview of the four groups of operations, we put forth two main arguments: (1) Computers are digital, and most image acquisition and communication efforts at present are toward digital approaches. In the same vein, there are considerable advantages to taking an inherently digital approach to the above four groups of operations rather than using concepts based on continuous approximations. (2) Considering the fact that images are inherently fuzzy, to handle uncertainties and heterogeneity of object properties realistically, approaches based on fuzzy sets should be taken to the above four groups of operations. We give two examples in support of these arguments.

Keywords

Object Information Dynamic Object Deformable Object Digital Setting Object Definition 
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.
Download to read the full conference paper text

References

  1. [1]
    Cho, Z.H., Jones J.P. and Singh, M.: Foundations of Medical Imaging, New York, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (1993).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Udupa, J. and Herman, G. (eds.): 3D Imaging in Medicine, 2 nd Edition, Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press(1999).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Udupa, J.K.: “Interactive Segmentation and Boundary Surface Formation for 3D Digital Images,” Computer Graphics and Image Processing, 18 (1982), 213–235.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Perona, P. and Malik, J.: “Scale Space and Edge Detection Using Anisotropic Diffusion,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligent 12 (1983), 629–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Chin, R.T. and Yeh, C.L.: “Quantitative Evaluation of Some Edge-Preserving Noise Smoothing Techniques,” Computer Graphics and Image Processing 23 (1983), 67–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Herman, G.T., Rowland, S.W. and Yau, M.-M.: “A Comparative Study of the Use of Linear and Modified Cubic Spline Interpolation for Image Reconstruction,” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science NS-26 (1979), no. 2, 2879–2894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Raya, S.P. and Udupa, J.K.: “Shape-Based Interpolation of Multidimensional Objects,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 9 (1990), no. 1, 32–42, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Woods, R.P. Cherry, S.R. and Mazziotta, J.C.: “Rapid Automated Algorithm for aligning and Reslicing PET Images,” Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 17 (1992), no. 4, 620–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Pelizzari, C.A., Chen, G.T.Y., Spelbring, D.R., Weichselbaum, R.R. and Chen, C.-T.: “Accurate Three-Dimensional Registration of CT, PET, and/or MR Images of the Brain,” Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 13 (1989), 20–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Gong, L. and Kulikowski, C.: “Composition of Image Analysis Processes Through Object-Centered Hierarchical Planning,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Medicine Intelligence 17 (1995), no. 10, 997–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    McInerney, T. and Terzopoulos, D.: “A Dynamic Finite Element Surface Model for Segmentation and Tracking in Multidimensional Medical Images With Application to Cardiac 4D Image Analysis,” Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics 19 (1995), no. 1, 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Udupa, J.K. and Samarasekera, S.: “Fuzzy Connectedness and Object Definition: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications in Image Segmentation,” Graphical Models and Image Processing 58 (1996), no. 3, 246–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Goldwasser, S. and Reynolds, R.: “Real-time Display and Manipulation of 3-D Medical Objects: The Voxel Machine Architecture,” Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing 39 (1987), no.4, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Lacroute, P.G.: “Fast Volume Rendering Using a Shear-Warp Factorization of the Viewing Transformation,” Technical Report CSL-TR-95-678, Ph.D. Thesis, Departments of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California, September (1995).Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Udupa, J.K. and Odhner, D.: ldFast Visualization, Manipulation, and Analysis of Binary Volumetric Objects,” IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 11 (1991), no. 6, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Udupa, J.K. and Odhner, D.: “Shell Rendering,” IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 13 (1993), no. 6, 58–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Odhner, D. and Udupa, J.K.: “Shell Manipulation: Interactive Alteration of Multiple-Material Fuzzy Structures,” SPIE Proceedings (1995) 2431:35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Waters, K.: “A Muscle Model for Animating Three Dimensional Facial Expression,” Proceedings of SIGGRAPH’87 21 (1987), no. 3, 17–24.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Lorensen, W. and Cline, H.: “Marching Cubes: A High Resolution 3D Surface Construction Algorithm,” Computer Graphics 21(1987), 163–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Udupa, J.K., Srihari, S.N. and Herman G.T.: “Boundary Detection in Multidimensions,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence PAMI-4 (1982), 41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Artzy, E., Frieder, G. and Herman, G.: “The Theory, Design, Implementation and Evaluation of a Three-Dimensional Surface Detection Algorithm, ” Computer Graphics and Image Processing 15 (1981), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Gordon, D. and Udupa, J.: “Fast Surface Tracking in Three-Dimensional Binary Images, ” Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing 45 (1989), 196–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Höhne, K.H. and Bernstein, R.: “Shading 3D Images from CT Using Gray-Level Gradients,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 5 (1986), 45–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Udupa, J. and Goncalves, R.: “Imaging Transforms for Visualizing Surfaces and Volumes,” Journal of Digital Imaging 6 (1993), 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Grevera, G.J. and Udupa, J.K.: “Order of Magnitude Faster Surface Rendering Via Software in a PC Than Using Dedicated Hardware,” SPIE Proceedings 3658 (1999), 202–211.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Kong, T.Y. and Rosenfeld, A. (eds.): Topological Algorithms for Digital Image Processing, New York, New York: Elsevier Science B.V. (1996).Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Frieder, G, Gordon, G. and Reynolds, R.: “Back-to-Front Display of Voxel-Based Objects,” IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 5 (1985), 52–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    Artzy, E.: “Display of Three-Dimensional Information in Computed Tomography, ” Computer Graphics and Image Processing 9 (1979), 196–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Herman, G. and Liu, H.: “Three-Dimensional Display of Human Organs from Computed Tomograms, ” Computer Graphics and Image Processing 9 (1979), 679–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Kaufman, A.: “Efficient Algorithms for 3-D Scan Conversion of Parametric Curves, Surfaces, and Volumes, ” Computer Graphics 21 (1987), 171–179.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    Rosenfeld, A.: “Fuzzy Digital Topology,” Information and Control 40 (1979), 76–87.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Udupa, J.K., Wei, L. Samarasekera, S., Miki, Y., van Buchem, M.A. and Grossman, R.I.: “Multiple Sclerosis Lesion Quantification Using Fuzzy Connectedness Principles,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 16 (1997), 246–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    Rice, B.L. and Udupa, J.K.: “Clutter-Free Volume Rendering for Magnetic Resonance Angiography Using Fuzzy Connectedness,” International Journal of Imaging System and Technology 11 (2000), 62–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    Saha, P.K., Udupa, J.K., Conant, E.F. and Chakraborty, D.P.: “Near-Automatic Segmentation and Quantification of Mammographic Glandular Tissue Density,” SPIE Proceedings 3661 (1999), 266–276.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jayaram K. Udupa
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology University of PennsylvaniaMedical Image Processing GroupPhiladelphia

Personalised recommendations