Human Supervisory Control Framework for Interactive Medical Image Segmentation

  • Ivan Kolesov
  • Peter Karasev
  • Grant Muller
  • Karol Chudy
  • John Xerogeanes
  • Allen Tannenbaum
Conference paper


In this work, interactive segmentation is integrated with an active contour model, and segmentation is posed as a human-supervisory-control problem. User input is tightly coupled with an automatic segmentation algorithm leveraging the user’s high-level anatomical knowledge and the automated method’s speed. Real-time visualization enables the user to quickly identify and correct the result in a subdomain where the variational model’s statistical assumptions do not agree with his expert knowledge. Methods developed in this work are applied to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) volumes as part of a population study of human skeletal development. Segmentation time is reduced by approximately five times over similarly accurate manual segmentation of large bone structures.


Segmentation Result Active Contour User Input Ground Truth Segmentation Interactive Segmentation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work was supported in part by grants from AFOSR, ARO, ONR, and MDA. This work is part of the National Alliance for Medical Image Computing (NA-MIC), funded by the National Institutes of Health through the NIH Roadmap for Medical Research, Grant U54 EB005149. Information on the National Centers for Biomedical Computing can be obtained from Finally, this project was supported by grants from the National Center for Research Resources (P41-RR-013218) and the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (P41-EB-015902) of the National Institutes of Health.


  1. 1.
    Hecker, F., Konrad, O., Horst, K., Peitgen, H.: Interactive 3d medical image segmentation with energy-minimizing implicit functions. J. Comput. Graph. 35(2), 275–287 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Westbrook, C. (ed.): MRI at a glance. Wiley, Malden (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sheridan, T. (ed.): Telerobotics, automation, and human supervisory control. MIT Press, Cambridge (1992)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mahfouz, M., Hoff, W., Komistek, R., Dennis, D.: A robust method for registration of three-dimensional knee implant models to two-dimensional flouroscopy images. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 22(12), 1561–1574 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lankton, S., Tannenbaum, A.: Localizing region-based active contours. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 17(11), 2029–2039 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Karasev, P., Kolesov, I., Chudy, K., Muller, G., Xerogeanes, J., Tannenbaum, A.: Interactive MRI segmentation with controlled active vision. In: IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference. Orlando, December 2011Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boykov, Y., Jolly, M.: Interactive graph cuts for optimal boundary region segmentation of objects in n-d images. In: ICCV. Vancouver, July 2001Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Osher, S., Sethian, J.A.: Fronts propagating with curvature dependent speed: algorithms based on Hamilton–Jacobi formulation. J. Comput. Phys. 79, 12–49 (1988)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Michailovich, O., Rathi, Y., Tannenbaum, A.: Image segmentation using active contours driven by the Bhattacharyya gradient flow. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 16(11), 2787–2801 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gao, Y., Tannenbaum, A., Kikinis, R.: Simultaneous multi-object segmentation using local robust statistics and contour interaction. In: MICCAI Medical Computer Vision, Workshop (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leventon, M.E., Grimson, W.E.L., Faugeras, O.: Statistical shape influence in geodesic active contours. In: Proc. IEEE Conf. Comput. Vision Pattern Recogn., vol. 1, pp. 316–323 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tsai, A., Yezzi, A., J., Wells, W., Tempany, C., Tucker, D., Fan, A., Grimson, W.E., Willsky, A.: A shape-based approach to the segmentation of medical imagery using level sets. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 22(2), 137–154 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barrett, W., Mortensen, E.: Interactive live-wire boundary extraction. Med. Image Anal. 1, 331–341 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Top, A., Hamarneh, G., Abugharbieh, R.: Spotlight: automated confidence-based user guidance for increasing efficiency in interactive 3d image segmentation. In: MICCAI, 2010Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yushkevich, P., Piven, J., Hazlett, H., Smith, R., Ho, S., Gee, J., Gerig, G.: User-guided 3d active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. NeuroImage 31, 1116–1128 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cates, J., Lefohn, A., Whitaker, R.: Gist: an interactive, GPU-based level set segmentation tool for 3d medical images. J. Med. Image Anal. 8, 217–231 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivan Kolesov
    • 1
  • Peter Karasev
    • 1
  • Grant Muller
    • 2
  • Karol Chudy
    • 3
  • John Xerogeanes
    • 2
  • Allen Tannenbaum
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Electrical & Computer EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Division Department of Orthopedic SurgeryEmory UniversityAtlantaUSA
  3. 3.School of Computer ScienceGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  4. 4.School of Electrical and Computer EngineeringBoston UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations