Search This Blog
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
Thursday, July 21, 2016
Monday, July 18, 2016
Sunday, July 17, 2016
Monday, July 11, 2016
Friday, July 8, 2016
Added new Dynamic Model: "DDC Stretched Exponential fit S = S0*(exp(-b*ADC)^alpha)"
Tested on the standard ABT dataset identical to ADC:
For comparison, we performed the ADC fit on the same data:
Corresponding Alpha-map processed over the ROI
Tested on the standard ABT dataset identical to ADC:
![]() |
| DDC fit: DDC=0.0016, alpha=0.34, Residual=2.03 |
![]() |
| ADC fit: ADC=0.001152, Residual=12 |
Corresponding Alpha-map processed over the ROI
Thursday, July 7, 2016
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
Saturday, June 18, 2016
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
Tuesday, June 14, 2016
Friday, June 10, 2016
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
Saturday, June 4, 2016
Saturday, May 28, 2016
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Sunday, May 22, 2016
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Sunday, May 15, 2016
Build 216 is released.
- RasterPaintbrush Tool\Dialog: fixed the defect when the SmartZoom option setting was not remembered.
- N4-tool: implemented the option Output field.
- N4 dialog box: replace the "Field Smoothness" name with the "Spline Distance" to emphasize difference with the NYU-N3 tool between those 2 terms.
- N3-NYU tool: fixed the crash for large values of the "Field Smoothness" = 200.
- N4 crash defect, with supplied parameters (iter=75): fixed.
- Non-Uniformity Measurement: fixed a defect that exactly two ROI layers are required for the measurement.
- Now any number of ROIs might be present, as long as only two are ENABLED.
- Non-Uniformity measurement: implemented function and Menu Item to measure 2 sets of blobs that are not completely paired. This allows to measure non-uniformity more completely, while using the paired blobs for constraints.
Friday, May 13, 2016
Wednesday, May 11, 2016
Friday, May 6, 2016
Wednesday, May 4, 2016
Tuesday, May 3, 2016
Monday, May 2, 2016
Sunday, May 1, 2016
Saturday, April 30, 2016
Thursday, April 28, 2016
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
MagTrace on Hippocampus.
First experiment: To evaluate the quality of snapping, I used the supplied HC Roi as the guidance. I clicked precisely on the boundary of the HC-ROI and let the software to adjust the position.
Attached screenshot shows the snapped points, without any manual further corrections.
Note: the snapping was performed on x3 upsampled resolution (EMD\Radial\2.2).
First experiment: To evaluate the quality of snapping, I used the supplied HC Roi as the guidance. I clicked precisely on the boundary of the HC-ROI and let the software to adjust the position.
Attached screenshot shows the snapped points, without any manual further corrections.
Note: the snapping was performed on x3 upsampled resolution (EMD\Radial\2.2).
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Monday, April 25, 2016
Friday, April 22, 2016
Sunday, April 17, 2016
Thursday, April 14, 2016
Improved the semi-automatic "Snap-To-Point" function and corresponding UI.
This is mostly due to better matching and usage of Splines.
This is mostly due to better matching and usage of Splines.
![]() |
| Initial pass: user quickly clicks on desired location and proceeds WITHOUT correction |
![]() |
| On the second, manual pass, user simply drags the control points (about 5-6) in this example and contour adjusts. |
Monday, April 11, 2016
While "Snap-to-Point" feature works quite well on femur, there are areas where local features are not sufficient to reliably detect the desired location
To solve this problem I propose to include additional mechanisms, see figure below.
![]() |
| Problematic boundary for "Snap-to-Point" |
![]() |
| Typical structure of the edges. Local structure is not sufficient to reconstruct a good snapping location. |
Friday, April 8, 2016
First runs of new MagPoly tool on the femur:
First user performs several clicks on perceived contour of the femur. Computer calculates the edge pattern next to the click and selects a "snapping" location setting an anchor point.
Two important points:
a) Even if snapping did not work properly - operator proceeds with the next points (there will be a cleanup stage later).
b) Work is performed on a full Zoomout, so User does not have to Zoom In and back and scroll!
c) In between the anchor points, a cardinal spline with application-specific tension is used.
d) 10-voxel snapping radius was used.
In the followup stage. User returns and drags some anchors to improve their positions. In this example about 6 anchors were corrected.
First user performs several clicks on perceived contour of the femur. Computer calculates the edge pattern next to the click and selects a "snapping" location setting an anchor point.
Two important points:
a) Even if snapping did not work properly - operator proceeds with the next points (there will be a cleanup stage later).
b) Work is performed on a full Zoomout, so User does not have to Zoom In and back and scroll!
c) In between the anchor points, a cardinal spline with application-specific tension is used.
d) 10-voxel snapping radius was used.
![]() | |
| Each anchor point corresponds to a single click |
![]() |
| After dragging 6 anchors. |
Wednesday, April 6, 2016
MagPoly tool: a simple interface to extend the functionality of the Polygon. It is purely 2D tool. No 3D extension is foreseen at the moment.

Tool is activated with the present Polygon tool. Then behavior changes according to dialog parameters.
|x| UseMagPoly - turns the tool on. Off = regular polyline.
"MagPoly radius": the cursor changes to a semitransparent circle (similar to the paintbrush cursor). Radius specify the snapping seaarch radius - this way user has some feedback how far she should click.
|x| Precompute slice edges (for slow computers). - at the moment I plan to compute edges each time user clicks within the apperture specified by the "MagPoly radius". Hopefully it will fill instantaneous on the mainstream computer. Otherwise, with the tool on each time the slice would change, the internal edge layer will be computed.
"Edge Parameters" - parameters identical to the Texture Edge detector.
Additional parameters will appear later on. F.e. more advance version would snap the curve between the user-specified Anchor points.
Tool is activated with the present Polygon tool. Then behavior changes according to dialog parameters.
|x| UseMagPoly - turns the tool on. Off = regular polyline.
"MagPoly radius": the cursor changes to a semitransparent circle (similar to the paintbrush cursor). Radius specify the snapping seaarch radius - this way user has some feedback how far she should click.
|x| Precompute slice edges (for slow computers). - at the moment I plan to compute edges each time user clicks within the apperture specified by the "MagPoly radius". Hopefully it will fill instantaneous on the mainstream computer. Otherwise, with the tool on each time the slice would change, the internal edge layer will be computed.
"Edge Parameters" - parameters identical to the Texture Edge detector.
Additional parameters will appear later on. F.e. more advance version would snap the curve between the user-specified Anchor points.
Saturday, April 2, 2016
Friday, April 1, 2016
Idea is to capture the spatial characteristics of the tumor by detecting Texture-sensitive edges within the tumor at different scales and different apperture weights.
Here are the corresponding Edge strength distribution histograms: They have a widely varying StdDev/Mean and so on.
We can also Build the "Concentric Profiles" of Edge Strength distribution ( in corresponding order)
![]() | ||||||
| EMD texture edges, Scale=3, Apperture=constant |
Here are the corresponding Edge strength distribution histograms: They have a widely varying StdDev/Mean and so on.
We can also Build the "Concentric Profiles" of Edge Strength distribution ( in corresponding order)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)









































