Advertisement

A Categorical Approach to Contour, Split and Join Trees with Application to Airway Segmentation

  • Andrzej SzymczakEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Mathematics and Visualization book series (MATHVISUAL)

Abstract

Contour, split and join trees can be defined as functors acting on the category of scalar fields, whose morphisms are value-preserving functions. The categorical definition provides a natural way to efficiently compute a variety of topological properties of all contours, sublevel or superlevel components in a scalar field. The result is a labeling of the contour, split or join tree and can be used to find all contours, sublevel or superlevel sets with desired properties.

We describe an algorithm for airway segmentation from Computed Tomography (CT) scans based on this paradigm. It computes all sublevel components in thick slices of the input image that have simple topology and branching structure. The output is a connected component of the union of all such sublevel components. This procedure can be viewed as a local thresholding approach, where the local thresholds are determined based on topological analysis of sublevel sets.

Keywords

Betti Number Categorical Approach Thick Slice Local Threshold Airway Tree 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    C. Bajaj, V. Pascucci, and D. R. Schikore. The contour spectrum. In Proc. IEEE Visualization’97, pages 167–175, 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nathanael Berglund and Andrzej Szymczak. Making contour trees subdomain-aware. In Proceedings of the 16th Canadian Conference on Computational Geometry (CCCG’04), pages 188–191, 2004.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Bhaniramka, R. Wenger, and R. Crawfis. Iso-contouring in higher dimensions. In Proceedings IEEE Visualization 2000, pages 267–273, 2000.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. Carr, J. Snoeyink, and U. Axen. Computing contour trees in all dimensions. Computational Geometry, 24:75–94, 2003.zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yi-Jen Chiang and Xiang Lu. Simple and optimal output-sensitive computation of contour trees. Technical Report TR-CIS-2003-02, Polytechnic University, June 2003.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. Cole-Mclaughlin, H. Edelsbrunner, J. Harer, V. Natarajan, and V. Pascucci. Loops in reeb graphs of 2-manifolds. In Proc. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom., pages 344–350. ACM Press, 2003.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kree Cole-McLaughlin, Herbert Edelsbrunner, John Harer, Vijay Natarajan, and Valerio Pascucci. Loops in reeb graphs of 2-manifolds. Discrete & Computational Geometry, 32(2):231–244, 2004.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. de Berg and M. van Kreveld. Trekking in the alps without freezing or getting tired. Algorithmica, 18:306–323, 1997.zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Mori, J. Hasegawa, J. Toriwaki, H. Anno, and K. Katada. Recognition of bronchus in three-dimensional x-ray ct images with applications to virtualized bronchoscopy system. In Proceedings of ICPR’96, pages 528–532, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    James R Munkres. Elements of algebraic topology. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Menlo Park, Calif., 1984.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    V. Pascucci and K. Cole-McLaughlin. Efficient computation of the topology of level sets. In VIS ’02: Proceedings of the conference on Visualization ’02, pages 187–194, Washington, DC, USA, 2002. IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    V. Pascucci and K. Cole-McLaughlin. Parallel computation of the topology of level sets. Algorithmica, 38(2):249–268, October 2003.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Valerio Pascucci, Giorgio Scorzelli, Peer-Timo Bremer, and Ajith Mascarenhas. Robust on-line computation of reeb graphs: simplicity and speed. ACM Trans. Graph., 26(3):58, 2007.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Andrzej Szymczak and James Vanderhyde. Airway segmentation by topology-driven local thresholding. In Proc. SPIE Medical Imaging 2008 (Vol. 6914), page 69143D, 2008.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. P. Tarasov and M. N. Vyalyi. Construction of contour trees in 3d in o(nlogn) steps. In Proc. 14th Ann. Sympos. Comput. Geom. 1998, pages 68–75, 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. van Kreveld, R. van Oostrum, C. Bajaj, V. Pascucci, and D. Schikore. Contour trees and small seed sets for isosurface generation. In Sanjay Rana, editor, Topological Data Structures for Surfaces, pages 71–86. Wiley Europe, March 2004.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. van Kreveld, R. van Oostrum, C. Bajaj, V. Pascucci, and D. R. Schikore. Contour trees and small seed sets for isosurface traversal. In Proc. 13th ACM Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG)’97, pages 212–220, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematical and Computer SciencesColorado School of MinesGoldenUSA

Personalised recommendations