Journal of Medical Imaging · 2018 · 240 citations · 27 references
ComputingBiomedical EngineeringBiomedical ImagingDiagnostic ImagingDiagnostic RadiologyImage SegmentationMedical Image AnalysisMedical ImagingSegmentation AnalysisShape AnalysisShape MetricsError SensitivityEvaluation MetricsMedical Image SegmentationSegmentationSegmentation EvaluationSegmentation Evaluation MetricsSegmentation Quality MetricsThree-dimensional Medical Imaging
Medical image segmentation algorithms lack a widely accepted evaluation framework, and existing metrics are inconsistent, each sensitive to specific error types and none covering all. We introduce a family of hybrid metrics for segmentation evaluation. These metrics compute average overlap in fixed-size boundary neighborhoods, are evaluated on synthetic 2D and 3D medical image segmentations, and a representative metric’s parameter effects on sensitivity and runtime are analyzed. The metrics outperform existing ones by sensitively penalizing combined error types, especially boundary errors, yielding lower similarity scores when other metrics disagree and covering a broader score range.
All medical image segmentation algorithms need to be validated and compared, yet no evaluation framework is widely accepted within the imaging community. None of the evaluation metrics that are popular in the literature are consistent in the way they rank segmentation results: they tend to be sensitive to one or another type of segmentation error (size, location, and shape) but no single metric covers all error types. We introduce a family of metrics, with hybrid characteristics. These metrics quantify the similarity or difference of segmented regions by considering their average overlap in fixed-size neighborhoods of points on the boundaries of those regions. Our metrics are more sensitive to combinations of segmentation error types than other metrics in the existing literature. We compare the metric performance on collections of segmentation results sourced from carefully compiled two-dimensional synthetic data and three-dimensional medical images. We show that our metrics: (1) penalize errors successfully, especially those around region boundaries; (2) give a low similarity score when existing metrics disagree, thus avoiding overly inflated scores; and (3) score segmentation results over a wider range of values. We analyze a representative metric from this family and the effect of its free parameter on error sensitivity and running time.
27
Measures of the Amount of Ecologic Association Between Species
Lee R. Dice · Ecology · 1945 · 11.9K citations
A survey on evaluation methods for image segmentation
Y.J. Zhang · Pattern Recognition · 1996 · 1.1K citations