Penalized Fisher discriminant analysis and its application to image-based morphometry

Image-based morphometry is an important area of pattern recognition research, with numerous applications in science and technology (including biology and medicine). Fisher Linear Discriminant Analysis (FLDA) techniques are often employed to elucidate and visualize important information that discriminates between two or more populations. We demonstrate that the direct application of FLDA can lead to undesirable errors in characterizing such information and that the reason for such errors is not necessarily the ill conditioning in the resulting generalized eigenvalue problem, as usually assumed. We show that the regularized eigenvalue decomposition often used is related to solving a modified FLDA criterion that includes a least-squares-type representation penalty, and derive the relationship explicitly. We demonstrate the concepts by applying this modified technique to several problems in image-based morphometry, and build discriminant representative models for different data sets.

[1]  Christos Davatzikos,et al.  Anatomical Equivalence Class: A Morphological Analysis Framework Using a Lossless Shape Descriptor , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[2]  M L Mendelsohn,et al.  THE ANALYSIS OF CELL IMAGES * , 1966, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[3]  B. Scholkopf,et al.  Fisher discriminant analysis with kernels , 1999, Neural Networks for Signal Processing IX: Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE Signal Processing Society Workshop (Cat. No.98TH8468).

[4]  R. Fisher.  THE USE OF MULTIPLE MEASUREMENTS IN TAXONOMIC PROBLEMS , 1936 .

[5]  Carey E. Priebe,et al.  Collaborative computational anatomy: An MRI morphometry study of the human brain via diffeomorphic metric mapping , 2009, Human Brain Mapping.

[6]  Nasser M. Nasrabadi,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning , 2006, Technometrics.

[7]  Christopher M. Bishop,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Information Science and Statistics) , 2006 .

[8]  Nicolas Cherbuin,et al.  Hippocampal shape analysis for Alzheimer's disease using an efficient hypothesis test and regularized discriminative deformation , 2009, Hippocampus.

[9]  W. Eric L. Grimson,et al.  Detection and analysis of statistical differences in anatomical shape , 2005, Medical Image Anal..

[10]  Ting Zhao,et al.  Automated learning of generative models for subcellular location: Building blocks for systems biology , 2007, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[11]  D'arcy W. Thompson.  On growth and form i , 1943 .

[12]  Gustavo K. Rohde,et al.  A graph-based method for detecting characteristic phenotypes from biomedical images , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro.

[13]  Michael I. Miller,et al.  Large Deformation Diffeomorphism and Momentum Based Hippocampal Shape Discrimination in Dementia of the Alzheimer type , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[14]  D. Kendall.  SHAPE MANIFOLDS, PROCRUSTEAN METRICS, AND COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES , 1984 .

[15]  Timothy F. Cootes,et al.  Active Shape Models-Their Training and Application , 1995, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[16]  Keinosuke Fukunaga,et al.  Introduction to Statistical Pattern Recognition , 1972 .

[17]  Hua Yu,et al.  A direct LDA algorithm for high-dimensional data - with application to face recognition , 2001, Pattern Recognit..

[18]  Bjarne K. Ersbøll,et al.  FAME-a flexible appearance modeling environment , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[19]  Gustavo K. Rohde,et al.  An Optimal Transportation Approach for Nuclear Structure-Based Pathology , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[20]  L. Younes,et al.  Statistics on diffeomorphisms via tangent space representations , 2004, NeuroImage.

[21]  Welch Bl.  THE GENERALIZATION OF ‘STUDENT'S’ PROBLEM WHEN SEVERAL DIFFERENT POPULATION VARLANCES ARE INVOLVED , 1947 .

[22]  David J. Kriegman,et al.  Eigenfaces vs. Fisherfaces: Recognition Using Class Specific Linear Projection , 1996, ECCV.

[23]  P. Thomas Fletcher,et al.  Principal geodesic analysis for the study of nonlinear statistics of shape , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[24]  Zhihua Zhang,et al.  Regularized Discriminant Analysis, Ridge Regression and Beyond , 2010, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[25]  Alejandro F Frangi,et al.  Automatic construction of 3-D statistical deformation models of the brain using nonrigid registration , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[26]  U. Grenander,et al.  Computational anatomy: an emerging discipline , 1998 .

[27]  G. Papanicolaou,et al.  New cancer diagnosis , 1973 .

[28]  F. Bookstein,et al.  The Measurement of Biological Shape and Shape Change. , 1980 .

[29]  Robert F Murphy,et al.  Deformation‐based nuclear morphometry: Capturing nuclear shape variation in HeLa cells , 2008, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[30]  Ming-Tsang Wu,et al.  Computerized nuclear morphometry in thyroid follicular neoplasms , 2005, Pathology international (Print).

[31]  Keinosuke Fukunaga,et al.  Introduction to statistical pattern recognition (2nd ed.) , 1990 .

[32]  C. Schmid,et al.  High-Dimensional Discriminant Analysis , 2005 .

[33]  D'arcy W. Thompson,et al.  On Growth and Form , 1917, Nature.

[34]  Z Pincus,et al.  Comparison of quantitative methods for cell‐shape analysis , 2007, Journal of microscopy.

[35]  J. Friedman.  Regularized Discriminant Analysis , 1989 .

[36]  Wei Wang,et al.  Detection and classification of thyroid follicular lesions based on nuclear structure from histopathology images , 2010, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[37]  Jitendra Malik,et al.  SVM-KNN: Discriminative Nearest Neighbor Classification for Visual Category Recognition , 2006, 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'06).

[38]  Weiqin Jiang,et al.  Using nuclear morphometry to discriminate the tumorigenic potential of cells: a comparison of statistical methods. , 2004, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.