| Re: Medical Imaging Question [message #16685 is a reply to message #16618] |
Mon, 16 August 1999 00:00   |
m218003
Messages: 56
Registered: August 1999
|
Member |
|
|
In article <7os14l$krr@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>,
pford@bcm.tmc.edu (Patrick V. Ford) writes:
> David Fanning (davidf@dfanning.com) wrote:
[...]
> One of the problems with the above scheme with nuclear medicine images is
> that there may be a few pixels that are several magnitude larger than all the
> other pixel, therefore using a range 0-100, the max value is set at 100
> and everything else falls into the range 0 to 10 for example. This can be
> corrected by truncating the max pixel value. Unfortunately, the vendors
> seem to be clueless how to do this other than manual trial and error
> method.
>
>
maybe I am too loud here, but shouldn't this kind of problem be easily
recognized by standard statistical outlier tests? That almost screams for
Struan's beloved histogram function, doesn't it? If you need something more
sophisticated, it appears that this problem is related to the problem of
determining biomass burning fires on satellite images (there they are looking
for the hot spots you are trying to exclude). Basically, one would look for
outlier values and reject them only if no neighbouring pixel shows similarily
high values. But, of course, this takes some processing time...
Cheers,
Martin.
Martin Schultz -- MPI fuer Meteorologie, Bundesstr. 55, 20146 Hamburg
martin.schultz@dkrz.de
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
