Geometric constraint analysis and synthesis: Methods for improving shape-based registration accuracy

  • David A. Simon
  • Takeo Kanade
Validation of Registration Techniques
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1205)


Shape-based registration is a process for estimating the transformation between two shape representations of an object. It is used in many image-guided surgical systems to establish a transformation between pre- and intra-operative coordinate systems. This paper describes several tools which are useful for improving the accuracy resulting from shape-based registration: constraint analysis, constraint synthesis, and online accuracy estimation. Constraint analysis provides a scalar measure of sensitivity which is well correlated with registration accuracy. This measure can be used as a criterion function by constraint synthesis, an optimization process which generates configurations of registration data which maximize expected accuracy. Online accuracy estimation uses a conventional root-mean-squared error measure coupled with constraint analysis to estimate an upper bound on true registration error. This paper demonstrates that registration accuracy can be significantly improved via application of these methods.


geometric constraint analysis geometric constraint synthesis online accuracy estimation shaped-based registration intra-operative registration 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    S. Baluja and R. Caruana. Removing the genetics from the standard genetic algorithm. In A. Prieditis, ed, Proc. Int'l Conf. Mach. Learning, pp. 38–46, San Mateo, CA, 1995. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    P. Besl and N. McKay. A method for registration of 3-d shapes. IEEE. PAMI, 14(2):239–256, Feb 1992.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    E. Cuchet et al., Registration in neurosurgery and neuroradiotherapy applications. In Proc 2nd Int'l Symp. MRCAS, pp. 31–38, Baltimore, Nov. 1995.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. G. Kendall and A. Stuart. Canonical Variables, chap 43, pp. 320–369. Griffin, London, 4th ed., 1977.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    S. Lavallee. Registration for computer-integrated surgery: Methodology, state of the art. In R. H. Taylor, et al., eds, Computer-Integrated Surgery, chap 5, pp 77–97. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1995.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    C.H. Menq, H.T. Yau, and G.Y. Lai. Automated precision measurement of surface profile in CAD-directed inspection. IEEE Trans. Robotics and Automation, 8(2):268–278, April 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    A. Nahvi and J.M. Hollerbach. The noise amplification index for optimal pose selection in robot calibration. In Proc IEEE Int'l Conf. Robotics and Automation, Minneapolis, April 1996.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    D. A. Simon. Fast and Accurate Shape-Based Registration. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, December 1996.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    D. A. Simon, et al., Development and validation of a navigational guidance system for acetabular implant placement. In Proc. 1st Joint CVRMed/MRCAS Conference, Grenoble, March 1997.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    D. A. Simon, et al., Accuracy validation in image-guided orthopaedic surgery. In Proc. 2nd Int'l Symp. MRCAS, Baltimore, Nov. 1995.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    D. A. Simon, M. Hebert, and T. Kanade. Techniques for fast and accurate intra-surgical registration. Journal of Image Guided Surgery, 1(1):17–29, April 1995.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    G. Taubin. Est'n of planar curves, surfaces, and nonplanar space curves defined by implicit eqn's with applications to edge and range image segmentation. IEEE Trans PAMI, 13(11):1115–1138, Nov 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Robotics InstituteCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburgh
  2. 2.Center for Orthopaedic ResearchShadyside HospitalPittsburgh

Personalised recommendations