BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

William M. Wells III

William M. Wells III contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computer Visioneess.IVMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

An Investigation of Feature-based Nonrigid Image Registration using Gaussian Process

For a wide range of clinical applications, such as adaptive treatment planning or intraoperative image update, feature-based deformable registration (FDR) approaches are widely employed because of their simplicity and low computational complexity. FDR algorithms estimate a dense displacement field by interpolating a sparse field, which is given by the established correspondence between selected features. In this paper, we consider the deformation field as a Gaussian Process (GP), whereas the selected features are regarded as prior information on the valid deformations. Using GP, we are able to estimate the both dense displacement field and a corresponding uncertainty map at once. Furthermore, we evaluated the performance of different hyperparameter settings for squared exponential kernels with synthetic, phantom and clinical data respectively. The quantitative comparison shows, GP-based interpolation has performance on par with state-of-the-art B-spline interpolation. The greatest clinical benefit of GP-based interpolation is that it gives a reliable estimate of the mathematical uncertainty of the calculated dense displacement map.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Are Registration Uncertainty and Error Monotonically Associated

In image-guided neurosurgery, current commercial systems usually provide only rigid registration, partly because it is harder to predict, validate and understand non-rigid registration error. For instance, when surgeons see a discrepancy in aligned image features, they may not be able to distinguish between registration error and actual tissue deformation caused by tumor resection. In this case, the spatial distribution of registration error could help them make more informed decisions, e.g., ignoring the registration where the estimated error is high. However, error estimates are difficult to acquire. Probabilistic image registration (PIR) methods provide measures of registration uncertainty, which could be a surrogate for assessing the registration error. It is intuitive and believed by many clinicians that high uncertainty indicates a large error. However, the monotonic association between uncertainty and error has not been examined in image registration literature. In this pilot study, we attempt to address this fundamental problem by looking at one PIR method, the Gaussian process (GP) registration. We systematically investigate the relation between GP uncertainty and error based on clinical data and show empirically that there is a weak-to-moderate positive monotonic correlation between point-wise GP registration uncertainty and non-rigid registration error.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Confidence Calibration and Predictive Uncertainty Estimation for Deep Medical Image Segmentation

Fully convolutional neural networks (FCNs), and in particular U-Nets, have achieved state-of-the-art results in semantic segmentation for numerous medical imaging applications. Moreover, batch normalization and Dice loss have been used successfully to stabilize and accelerate training. However, these networks are poorly calibrated i.e. they tend to produce overconfident predictions both in correct and erroneous classifications, making them unreliable and hard to interpret. In this paper, we study predictive uncertainty estimation in FCNs for medical image segmentation. We make the following contributions: 1) We systematically compare cross entropy loss with Dice loss in terms of segmentation quality and uncertainty estimation of FCNs; 2) We propose model ensembling for confidence calibration of the FCNs trained with batch normalization and Dice loss; 3) We assess the ability of calibrated FCNs to predict segmentation quality of structures and detect out-of-distribution test examples. We conduct extensive experiments across three medical image segmentation applications of the brain, the heart, and the prostate to evaluate our contributions. The results of this study offer considerable insight into the predictive uncertainty estimation and out-of-distribution detection in medical image segmentation and provide practical recipes for confidence calibration. Moreover, we consistently demonstrate that model ensembling improves confidence calibration.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

On the Applicability of Registration Uncertainty

Estimating the uncertainty in (probabilistic) image registration enables, e.g., surgeons to assess the operative risk based on the trustworthiness of the registered image data. If surgeons receive inaccurately calculated registration uncertainty and misplace unwarranted confidence in the alignment solutions, severe consequences may result. For probabilistic image registration (PIR), the predominant way to quantify the registration uncertainty is using summary statistics of the distribution of transformation parameters. The majority of existing research focuses on trying out different summary statistics as well as a means to exploit them. Distinctively, in this paper, we study two rarely examined topics: (1) whether those summary statistics of the transformation distribution most informatively represent the registration uncertainty; (2) Does utilizing the registration uncertainty always be beneficial. We show that there are two types of uncertainties: the transformation uncertainty, Ut, and label uncertainty Ul. The conventional way of using Ut to quantify Ul is inappropriate and can be misleading. By a real data experiment, we also share a potentially critical finding that making use of the registration uncertainty may not always be an improvement.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access