Hi All<br>
<br>
I am working right now on 3D Ultrasound registration of bone
surfaces. First in order to understand the registration framework
and also see the results in 2D I registered 2D Ultrasound slices using
MAttesmutualinformation metric with affine transformation. <br>
<br>
I have also despeckled the Ultrasound images before this regiostration.
The algorithm works perfect for my images. On monday I started to work
with 3D images. But the results are really bad.:( <br>
<br>
I am using the algorithm given below to scale the parameters.<br>
<br style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">
<span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> parametersScales.Fill( 24.0 );</span><br style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">
<span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">unsigned int j;</span><br style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">
<span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> for ( j = 9; j < 12; j++ )</span><br style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">
<span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> {</span><br style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">
<span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> parametersScales[j] = 0.001;</span><br style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">
<span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> }</span><br style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">
<br style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">
<span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> optimizer->SetScales( parametersScales );</span><br>
<br>
<br clear="all">I think the parameters need to be tunned again for 3D
images. If I change the scaling values for the first 9 values of
parameters from 20 lets say 400 or to a smaller number 0.001 will this
mean ( for 400 ) less rotations, scaling and shearing and scewing and
for 0.001 much more rotations scaling and shearing?????<br>
<br>
I have learned from Luis that if I change the parameter scaling for
translation from 1/500 to 1/100000 this will make much more
translations and little rotations. So I think I will not change the
scaling parameter for the translation values.<br>
<br>
<br>
I will also try the multiresolution registration algorithm and
deformable ergistration algorithms. Could anyone suggest me which one
of them would be much better for registration of<br>
bone surfaces in Ultrasound images? Would it be a better ergistration
if I first use affine transform to get an initial transfrom matrix and
then use the Bsplinetransformation algorithm for my registration
problem?<br>
<br>
cause in my volumes the surface reflection of the bones are not seen on
each slice. Lets say if I have 150 slices I can only see the surface
reflection of the bones in 90 slices. Would it be much meaningfull to
to construct this slices into a different volume and work with them.???<br>
<br>
Or can I also define a region of interest for mutual information
metric in order to start the algorithm close to an optimal solution .
Cause i think It gets stuck on regions of my ultrasound volumes because
of the speckle noise. <br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
ilker<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>-- <br>------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>'.....ich möchte mir eine ader öffnen, die mir die ewige freiheit schaffte....'<br><br>--------------------------------------------------------------------