Foveated Model Observers for Visual Search in 3D Medical Images

Model observers have a long history of success in predicting human observer performance in clinically-relevant detection tasks. New 3D image modalities provide more signal information but vastly increase the search space to be scrutinized. Here, we compared standard linear model observers (ideal observers, non-pre-whitening matched filter with eye filter, and various versions of Channelized Hotelling models) to human performance searching in 3D 1/f2.8 filtered noise images and assessed its relationship to the more traditional location known exactly detection tasks and 2D search. We investigated two different signal types that vary in their detectability away from the point of fixation (visual periphery). We show that the influence of 3D search on human performance interacts with the signal’s detectability in the visual periphery. Detection performance for signals difficult to detect in the visual periphery deteriorates greatly in 3D search but not in 3D location known exactly and 2D search. Standard model observers do not predict the interaction between 3D search and signal type. A proposed extension of the Channelized Hotelling model (foveated search model) that processes the image with reduced spatial detail away from the point of fixation, explores the image through eye movements, and scrolls across slices can successfully predict the interaction observed in humans and also the types of errors in 3D search. Together, the findings highlight the need for foveated model observers for image quality evaluation with 3D search.

[1]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[2]  Kenneth E. Weaver,et al.  An Assortment Of Image Quality Indexes For Radiographic Film-Screen Combinations ---Can They Be Resolved? , 1972, Other Conferences.

[3]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Efficiency of human visual signal discrimination. , 1981, Science.

[4]  P F Judy,et al.  Detection of noisy visual targets: Models for the effects of spatial uncertainty and signal-to-noise ratio , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[5]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detection. II. Signal-location identification. , 1984, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[6]  H. Barrett,et al.  Effect of noise correlation on detectability of disk signals in medical imaging. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[7]  H H Barrett,et al.  Addition of a channel mechanism to the ideal-observer model. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[8]  Harold L. Kundel,et al.  Perception Errors in Chest Radiography , 1989 .

[9]  A. Hendrickson,et al.  Human photoreceptor topography , 1990, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[10]  S.W. Smith,et al.  High-speed ultrasound volumetric imaging system. I. Transducer design and beam steering , 1991, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[11]  H H Barrett,et al.  Effect of random background inhomogeneity on observer detection performance. , 1992, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[12]  C W Thomas,et al.  Perceptual comparison of pulsed and continuous fluoroscopy. , 1994, Medical physics.

[13]  J. Palmer Set-size effects in visual search: The effect of attention is independent of the stimulus for simple tasks , 1994, Vision Research.

[14]  A. Burgess Statistically defined backgrounds: performance of a modified nonprewhitening observer model. , 1994, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[15]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Lesion detection in structured noise. , 1995, Academic radiology.

[16]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Observer signal-to-noise ratios for the ML-EM algorithm , 1996, Medical Imaging.

[17]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. I. Effect of number of possible spatial locations and signal contrast. , 1996, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[18]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Role of knowledge in human visual temporal integration in spatiotemporal noise. , 1996, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[19]  D. Dearnaley,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): considerations and applications in radiotherapy treatment planning. , 1997, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[20]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Practical issues and methodology in assessment of image quality using model observers , 1997, Medical Imaging.

[21]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detectability with two noise components: anomalous masking effects. , 1997, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[22]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Human vs model observers in anatomic backgrounds , 1998, Medical Imaging.

[23]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Stabilized estimates of Hotelling-observer detection performance in patient-structured noise , 1998, Medical Imaging.

[24]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Effect of image compression in model and human performance , 1999, Medical Imaging.

[25]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  A Practical Guide to Model Observers for Visual Detection in Synthetic and Natural Noisy Images , 2000 .

[26]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. IV. Figures of merit for model performance in multiple-alternative forced-choice detection tasks with correlated responses. , 2000, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[27]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. III. Calculation of figures of merit for model observers in statistically nonstationary backgrounds. , 2000, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[28]  H H Barrett,et al.  Human- and model-observer performance in ramp-spectrum noise: effects of regularization and object variability. , 2001, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[29]  M. Eckstein,et al.  Quantifying the Performance Limits of Human Saccadic Targeting during Visual Search , 2001, Perception.

[30]  A. Burgess,et al.  Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise. , 2001, Medical physics.

[31]  Ronald J. Jaszczak,et al.  Using the Hotelling observer on multi-slice and multi-view simulated SPECT myocardial images , 2001 .

[32]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Model observers for signal-known-statistically tasks (SKS) , 2001, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[33]  H.H. Barrett,et al.  Model observers for assessment of image quality , 1993, 2002 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.

[34]  Jay Bartroff,et al.  Automated computer evaluation and optimization of image compression of x-ray coronary angiograms for signal known exactly detection tasks. , 2003, Optics express.

[35]  Robert O. Duncan,et al.  Cortical Magnification within Human Primary Visual Cortex Correlates with Acuity Thresholds , 2003, Neuron.

[36]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  Automated optimization of JPEG 2000 encoder options based on model observer performance for detecting variable signals in X-ray coronary angiograms , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[37]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  Evaluation of JPEG 2000 encoder options: human and model observer detection of variable signals in X-ray coronary angiograms , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[38]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  The effect of non-linear human visual system components on linear model observers , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[39]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Search for lesions in mammograms: statistical characterization of observer responses. , 2003, Medical physics.

[40]  D. Ballard,et al.  Eye movements in natural behavior , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[41]  Wilson S. Geisler,et al.  Optimal eye movement strategies in visual search , 2005, Nature.

[42]  Jeremy M. Wolfe,et al.  26.5 brief comms NEW , 2005 .

[43]  Eric Clarkson,et al.  Efficiency of the human observer detecting random signals in random backgrounds. , 2005, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[44]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Classification images for detection, contrast discrimination, and identification tasks with a common ideal observer. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[45]  D. DeLong,et al.  Effect of dose reduction on the detection of mammographic lesions: a mathematical observer model analysis. , 2007, Medical physics.

[46]  Kyle J Myers,et al.  Efficiency of the human observer for detecting a Gaussian signal at a known location in non-Gaussian distributed lumpy backgrounds. , 2007, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[47]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a comparison of breast cancer visibility and BIRADS classification in a population of cancers with subtle mammographic findings , 2008, European Radiology.

[48]  Wilson S. Geisler,et al.  Simple summation rule for optimal fixation selection in visual search , 2009, Vision Research.

[49]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Mass detection in breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a model observer study , 2009, Medical Imaging.

[50]  R M Nishikawa,et al.  Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise. , 2010, Medical physics.

[51]  Marcus Nyström,et al.  An adaptive algorithm for fixation, saccade, and glissade detection in eyetracking data , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[52]  William Hendee,et al.  The Handbook of Medical Image Perception and Techniques. , 2010, Medical physics.

[53]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Visual search: a retrospective. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[54]  I. Rentschler,et al.  Peripheral vision and pattern recognition: a review. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[55]  A. Burgess Visual perception studies and observer models in medical imaging. , 2011, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[56]  Ewout Vansteenkiste,et al.  Channelized Hotelling observers for the assessment of volumetric imaging data sets. , 2011, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[57]  Ivan Diaz,et al.  Measurements of the detectability of hepatic hypovascular metastases as a function of retinal eccentricity in CT images , 2012, Medical Imaging.

[58]  Preeti Verghese,et al.  Active search for multiple targets is inefficient , 2010, Vision Research.

[59]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  A unified bayesian observer analysis for set size and cueing effects on perceptual decisions and saccades. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[60]  Howard C Gifford A visual-search model observer for multislice-multiview SPECT images. , 2013, Medical physics.

[61]  Xiaochuan Pan,et al.  Comparison of human and Hotelling observer performance for a fan-beam CT signal detection task. , 2013, Medical physics.

[62]  Trafton Drew,et al.  Scanners and drillers: characterizing expert visual search through volumetric images. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[63]  Mini Das,et al.  Towards visual-search model observers for mass detection in breast tomosynthesis , 2013, Medical Imaging.

[64]  Xin He,et al.  Model Observers in Medical Imaging Research , 2013, Theranostics.

[65]  Rongping Zeng,et al.  Discovering intrinsic properties of human observers' visual search and mathematical observers' scanning. , 2014, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[66]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  Foveal analysis and peripheral selection during active visual sampling , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[67]  H C Gifford Efficient visual-search model observers for PET. , 2014, The British journal of radiology.

[68]  Shuai Leng,et al.  Implementation of a channelized Hotelling observer model to assess image quality of x-ray angiography systems , 2015, Journal of medical imaging.

[69]  Stephen Lam,et al.  Computed Tomography and the Secrets of Lung Nodules , 2015, Canadian Association of Radiologists journal = Journal l'Association canadienne des radiologistes.

[70]  Sheng Zhang,et al.  Optimal and human eye movements to clustered low value cues to increase decision rewards during search , 2015, Vision Research.

[71]  Mini Das,et al.  Visual-search observers for assessing tomographic x-ray image quality. , 2016, Medical physics.

[72]  Anando Sen,et al.  Accounting for anatomical noise in search-capable model observers for planar nuclear imaging , 2016, Journal of medical imaging.

[73]  R. Rosenholtz Capabilities and Limitations of Peripheral Vision. , 2016, Annual review of vision science.

[74]  Xin He,et al.  Three scenarios of ranking inconsistencies involving search tasks , 2016, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[75]  Per Skaane,et al.  Breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis , 2016, Breast Cancer.

[76]  Damien Racine,et al.  Anthropomorphic model observer performance in three-dimensional detection task for low-contrast computed tomography , 2016, Journal of medical imaging.

[77]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  The role of extra-foveal processing in 3D imaging , 2017, Medical Imaging.

[78]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Five factors that guide attention in visual search , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[79]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  Object detection through search with a foveated visual system , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[80]  Kyle J Myers,et al.  Optimization of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) acquisition parameters for human observers: effect of reconstruction algorithms , 2017, Physics in medicine and biology.

[81]  Melchi M. Michel,et al.  Intrinsic position uncertainty impairs overt search performance. , 2017, Journal of vision.

[82]  Krista A. Ehinger,et al.  Comparing search patterns in digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography: an eye tracking study , 2017, Journal of medical imaging.

[83]  Matthew A Kupinski,et al.  Correlation between a 2D channelized Hotelling observer and human observers in a low‐contrast detection task with multislice reading in CT , 2017, Medical physics.

[84]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Foveated model observers to predict human performance in 3D images , 2017, Medical Imaging.

[85]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Interactions of lesion detectability and size across single-slice DBT and 3D DBT , 2018, Medical Imaging.

[86]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Observer Models as a Surrogate to Perception Experiments , 2018, The Handbook of Medical Image Perception and Techniques.

[87]  Arthur Burgess Signal Detection in Radiology , 2018 .

[88]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Inter‐laboratory comparison of channelized hotelling observer computation , 2018, Medical physics.

[89]  Frank W. Samuelson,et al.  Evaluation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis as Replacement of Full-Field Digital Mammography Using an In Silico Imaging Trial , 2018, JAMA network open.

[90]  Arthur Burgess Signal Detection Theory: A Brief History , 2018 .