On the statistical nature of mammograms.

We show that digitized mammograms can be considered as evolving from a simple process. A given image results from passing a random input field through a linear filtering operation, where the filter transfer function has a self-similar characteristic. By estimating the functional form of the filter and solving the corresponding filtering equation, the analysis shows that the input field gray value distribution and spectral content can be approximated with parametric methods. The work gives a simple explanation for the variegated image appearance and multimodal character of the gray value distribution common to mammograms. Using the image analysis as a guide, a simulated mammogram is generated that has many statistical characteristics of real mammograms. Additional benefits may follow from understanding the functional form of the filter in conjunction with the input field characteristics that include the approximate parametric description of mammograms, showing the distinction between homogeneously dense and nondense images, and the development of mass analysis methods.

[1]  M. Giger,et al.  Digital Radiography , 1993, Acta radiologica.

[2]  J. G. Jones,et al.  Multiresolution statistical analysis of computer-generated fractal imagery , 1991, CVGIP Graph. Model. Image Process..

[3]  William Bialek,et al.  Statistics of Natural Images: Scaling in the Woods , 1993, NIPS.

[4]  L. Clarke,et al.  Tree structured wavelet transform segmentation of microcalcifications in digital mammography. , 1995, Medical physics.

[5]  D. Turcotte,et al.  Fractal image analysis - Application to the topography of Oregon and synthetic images. , 1990 .

[6]  D J Field,et al.  Relations between the statistics of natural images and the response properties of cortical cells. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[7]  M J Yaffe,et al.  Thickness-equalization processing for mammographic images. , 1997, Radiology.

[8]  R Di Paola,et al.  A fractal approach to the segmentation of microcalcifications in digital mammograms. , 1995, Medical physics.

[9]  E. Gelsema,et al.  Estimation of fractal dimension in radiographs. , 1996, Medical physics.

[10]  L P Clarke,et al.  Digital mammography: M-channel quadrature mirror filters (QMFs) for microcalcification extraction. , 1994, Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society.

[11]  V. Velanovich Fractal analysis of mammographic lesions: a feasibility study quantifying the difference between benign and malignant masses. , 1996, The American journal of the medical sciences.

[12]  Vijay K. Jain,et al.  Markov random field for tumor detection in digital mammography , 1995, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[13]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Fractal-Based Description of Natural Scenes , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[14]  Michael Brady,et al.  A Representation for Mammographic Image Processing , 1995, CVRMed.

[15]  Laurence P. Clarke,et al.  Multiresolution probability analysis of random fields , 1999 .

[16]  M. Yaffe,et al.  Signal-to-noise properties of mammographic film-screen systems. , 1985, Medical physics.

[17]  A. Oppenheim,et al.  Signal processing with fractals: a wavelet-based approach , 1996 .

[18]  G. W. Rogers,et al.  The application of fractal analysis to mammographic tissue classification. , 1994, Cancer letters.

[19]  Laurence P. Clarke,et al.  Multiresolution analysis of two-dimensional 1/f processes: approximation methods for random variable transformations , 1999 .

[20]  Jian Fan,et al.  Mammographic feature enhancement by multiscale analysis , 1994, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[21]  Joachim Dengler,et al.  Segmentation of microcalcifications in mammograms , 1991, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[22]  M L Giger,et al.  Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: analysis of bilateral subtraction images. , 1991, Medical physics.

[23]  Alex Pentland,et al.  On the Imaging of Fractal Surfaces , 1988, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[24]  Qian Huang,et al.  Can the fractal dimension of images be measured? , 1994, Pattern Recognit..

[25]  T. Peli Multiscale fractal theory and object characterization , 1990 .

[26]  Robin N. Strickland,et al.  Wavelet transforms for detecting microcalcifications in mammograms , 1996, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[27]  K Doi,et al.  Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: automated alignment of breast images and its effect on bilateral-subtraction technique. , 1994, Medical physics.

[28]  M. Giger,et al.  Multifractal radiographic analysis of osteoporosis. , 1994, Medical physics.

[29]  W. Philip Kegelmeyer Evaluation of stellate lesion detection in a standard mammogram data set , 1993, Electronic Imaging.

[30]  Graham H. Watson,et al.  Detection of unusual events in intermittent non‐Gaussian images using multiresolution background models , 1996 .

[31]  Baoyu Zheng,et al.  Digital mammography: mixed feature neural network with spectral entropy decision for detection of microcalcifications , 1996, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[32]  Walter C. Giffin,et al.  Transform Techniques for Probability Modeling , 1975 .

[33]  Laurence P. Clarke,et al.  Multiresolution probability analysis of gray-scaled images , 1998 .

[34]  G T Barnes,et al.  Radiographic mottle: a comprehensive theory. , 1982, Medical physics.