Robust retinal image registration using expectation maximisation with mutual information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Retinal images (RI) are widely used to diagnose a variety of eye conditions and diseases such as myopia and diabetic retinopathy. They are inherently characterised by having nonuniform illumination and low-contrast homogeneous regions which represent a unique set of challenges for retinal image registration (RIR). This paper investigates using the expectation maximization for principal component analysis based mutual information (EMPCA-MI) algorithm in RIR. It combines spatial features with mutual information to efficiently achieve improved registration performance. Experimental results for mono-modal RI datasets verify that EMPCA-MI together with Powell-Brent optimization affords superior robustness in comparison with existing RIR methods, including the geometrical features method. Index Terms— Image registration, principal component analysis, mutual information, expectation-maximization algorithms, retinopathy. Poster presented at: 38th International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 26th to 31st May 2013, Vancouver, Canada. doi: 10.1109/ICASSP.2013.6637824
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".