Nonrigid Registration of Ultrasound and MRI Using Contextual Conditioned Mutual Information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mutual information (MI) quantifies the information that is shared between two random variables and has been widely used as a similarity metric for multi-modal and uni-modal image registration. A drawback of MI is that it only takes into account the intensity values of corresponding pixels and not of neighborhoods. Therefore, it treats images as "bag of words" and the contextual information is lost. In this work, we present Contextual Conditioned Mutual Information (CoCoMI), which conditions MI estimation on similar structures. Our rationale is that it is more likely for similar structures to undergo similar intensity transformations. The contextual analysis is performed on one of the images offline. Therefore, CoCoMI does not significantly change the registration time. We use CoCoMI as the similarity measure in a regularized cost function with a B-spline deformation field and efficiently optimize the cost function using a stochastic gradient descent method. We show that compared to the state of the art local MI based similarity metrics, CoCoMI does not distort images to enforce erroneous identical intensity transformations for different image structures. We further present the results on nonrigid registration of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance (MR) patient data from image-guided neurosurgery trials performed in our institute and publicly available in the BITE dataset. We show that CoCoMI performs significantly better than the state of the art similarity metrics in US to MR registration. It reduces the average mTRE over 13 patients from 4.12 mm to 2.35 mm, and the maximum mTRE from 9.38 mm to 3.22 mm.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".