Robust Fusion of Probability Maps

The fusion of probability maps is required when trying to analyse a collection of image labels or probability maps produced by several segmentation algorithms or human raters. The challenge is to weight properly the combination of maps in order to reflect the agreement among raters, the presence of outliers and the spatial uncertainty in the consensus. In this paper, we address several shortcomings of prior work in continuous label fusion. We introduce a novel approach to jointly estimate a reliable consensus map and assess the production of outliers and the confidence in each rater. Our probabilistic model is based on Student’s t-distributions allowing local estimates of raters’ performances. The introduction of bias and spatial priors leads to proper rater bias estimates and a control over the smoothness of the consensus map. Image intensity information is incorporated by geodesic distance transform for binary masks. Finally, we propose an approach to cluster raters based on variational boosting thus producing possibly several alternative consensus maps. Our approach was successfully tested on the MICCAI 2016 MS lesions dataset, on MR prostate delineations and on deep learning based segmentation predictions of lung nodules from the LIDC dataset.

[1]  Albert Montillo,et al.  iSTAPLE: improved label fusion for segmentation by combining STAPLE with image intensity , 2013, Medical Imaging.

[2]  William M. Wells,et al.  Simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE): an algorithm for the validation of image segmentation , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[3]  Bennett A. Landman,et al.  Formulating Spatially Varying Performance in the Statistical Fusion Framework , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[4]  Ryan P. Adams,et al.  Variational Boosting: Iteratively Refining Posterior Approximations , 2016, ICML.

[5]  Simon K. Warfield,et al.  A Continuous STAPLE for Scalar, Vector, and Tensor Images: An Application to DTI Analysis , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[6]  Martin Styner,et al.  Objective Evaluation of Multiple Sclerosis Lesion Segmentation using a Data Management and Processing Infrastructure , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[7]  Bin Xing,et al.  MW151 Inhibited IL-1β Levels after Traumatic Brain Injury with No Effect on Microglia Physiological Responses , 2016, PloS one.

[8]  Jerry L Prince,et al.  Investigation of Bias in Continuous Medical Image Label Fusion , 2016, PloS one.

[9]  Brian B. Avants,et al.  The Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS) , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[10]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  Label Fusion in Atlas-Based Segmentation Using a Selective and Iterative Method for Performance Level Estimation (SIMPLE) , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[11]  Richard C. Pais,et al.  The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) and Image Database Resource Initiative (IDRI): a completed reference database of lung nodules on CT scans. , 2011, Medical physics.

[12]  Simon K. Warfield,et al.  Estimating A Reference Standard Segmentation With Spatially Varying Performance Parameters: Local MAP STAPLE , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[13]  Simon K. Warfield,et al.  Simultaneous Truth and Performance Level Estimation Through Fusion of Probabilistic Segmentations , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[14]  Andrew Blake,et al.  GeoS: Geodesic Image Segmentation , 2008, ECCV.

[15]  W. Eric L. Grimson,et al.  Using the logarithm of odds to define a vector space on probabilistic atlases , 2007, Medical Image Anal..

[16]  William M. Wells,et al.  Validation of image segmentation by estimating rater bias and variance , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[17]  Bennett A Landman,et al.  Non-local statistical label fusion for multi-atlas segmentation , 2013, Medical Image Anal..