Difference between revisions of "2011 Summer Project Week Breakout Session EMRegistration"
From NAMIC Wiki
(Created page with '== Summer Project Week Breakout Session: Registration for EM Segmenter == Tuesday June 21, 2011, 3-4pm, Star room. ====Synopsis: ==== The EM segmenter includes as a vital step …') |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| − | ====Attendees: ==== | + | ====Attendees (tentative): ==== |
*Kilian Pohl | *Kilian Pohl | ||
*Dominik Meier | *Dominik Meier | ||
| − | * | + | *Stephen Aylward |
*Hans Johnson | *Hans Johnson | ||
| − | + | *Bill Lorensen | |
| + | *Jim Miller | ||
| + | *Allen Tannenbaum | ||
==== Reference Material: ==== | ==== Reference Material: ==== | ||
Revision as of 14:16, 6 June 2011
Home < 2011 Summer Project Week Breakout Session EMRegistrationContents
Summer Project Week Breakout Session: Registration for EM Segmenter
Tuesday June 21, 2011, 3-4pm, Star room.
Synopsis:
The EM segmenter includes as a vital step the co-registration of a multiple subject atlas to obtain spatial priors for small region detection. The success of these priors depends heavily on the quality of the registration obtained. Because the registration includes a large-DOF nonrigid inter-subject registration, benchmarks for a good solution are largely absent. We seek an implementation of a registration using Slicer registration tools that will provide best possible robustness and if possible an estimate of reliability. Because this registration will be integrated into a slicer module, tools with a BSD license are strongly preferred.
Attendees (tentative):
- Kilian Pohl
- Dominik Meier
- Stephen Aylward
- Hans Johnson
- Bill Lorensen
- Jim Miller
- Allen Tannenbaum
Reference Material:
Preliminary Agenda:
- Description of the registration task for the EM segmenter
- Review of example case
- Comparison of BRAINSfit and CMTK strategies
- Discussion of design/implementation options/strategies
