• Documents
  • Authors
  • Tables
  • Log in
  • Sign up
  • MetaCart
  • Donate

CiteSeerX logo

Tools

Sorted by:
Try your query at:
Semantic Scholar Scholar Academic
Google Bing DBLP
Results 11 - 20 of 67,101
Next 10 →

Table 2. Optimal views based on model-based reconstruction.

in Finding Optimal Views for 3D Face Shape Modeling
by Jinho Lee, Jinho Lee, Baback Moghaddam, Baback Moghaddam, Hanspeter Pfister, Hanspeter Pfister, Raghu Machiraju, Raghu Machiraju 2004
"... In PAGE 7: ... Based on an average reconstruction time of 30 seconds, this search takes about 45 hours. The results are presented in Table2 which shows the optimal views for K = {1,2,3,4,5} and the correspond- ing minimum average reconstruction errors (refer to Table 1 for exact coordinates). The standard deviation of the indi- Figure 7.... In PAGE 7: ... Figure 7 shows the errors of all combinatorial view configurations for the case K = 4, ranked in ascending order of error. Each er- ror bar represents the subjects standard deviation for that configuration (the first error bar corresponds to the optimal configuration and is the subject standard deviation listed in Table2 ). Other plots for K = 1,2,3 and 5 are quite sim- ilar in nature, all showing a well-defined minimum with the subject variation (error-bars) being lowest for the best configuration (left most) and highest for the worst (right most).... In PAGE 7: ... Using the same search strategy, we now evaluate the visual hull construc- tions obtained from the given subset of silhouette im- ages and compare them to the ground truth. Table 3 shows the optimal views for K = {2,3,4,5} and the correspond- ing error values (same format as in Table2 except that the visual hull from a single silhouette (K = 1) has no fi- nite volume and is omitted). Note that a visual hull recon- struction (especially one from few images) is not a very... In PAGE 8: ... Interestingly, the first plateau corresponding to the top group is all the sub- sets which include the profile view #10 (one of the most salient). We can see marked similarities in the opti- mal views in Table2 and Table 3. For example, both methods indicate views #3 and #10 to be the most infor- mative.... In PAGE 8: ... For example, the two most salient views (#3 and #10) correspond very closely with the established (biomet- ric) standards of 3/4 view (INS photos) and profile view ( mugshot photos). We have not yet searched for K gt; 5 mainly due to the computational costs, but it appears that reconstructions do not improve significantly beyond 4-5 views (see the best errors listed in Table2 ). One can easily incorporate additional physical and operational constraints into our framework.... ..."
Cited by 7

Table 2.2: Algorithm for semi-simultaneous registration

in Diploma Thesis in Computer Science
by Three-dimensional Ultrasound Mosaicing, Christian Wachinger, Three-dimensional Ultrasound Mosaicing, Christian Wachinger, Technische Universität München, Autor Christian Wachinger, Aufgabensteller Prof, Dr. Nassir Navab, Frank Sauer Ph. D, Betreuer Wolfgang Wein, Christian Wachinger 2007

Table 1. Frame-based registration error between supine and prone positions. Patient 06 was excluded because the patient moved during the prone image acquisition.

in The Effect of Changing Patient Position from . . .
by Torsten Rohlfing, Calvin R. Maurer, Jr., David Dean , Robert J. Maciunas
"... In PAGE 6: ... This patient was therefore excluded from further analysis. The results of the quantitative analysis of the frame-based registration error between supine and prone positions are listed for each patient in Table1 . The maximum error was 2.... ..."

Table 1. Frame-based registration error between supine and prone positions. Patient 06 was excluded because the patient moved during the prone image acquisition.

in
by unknown authors
"... In PAGE 6: ... This patient was therefore excluded from further analysis. The results of the quantitative analysis of the frame-based registration error between supine and prone positions are listed for each patient in Table1 . The maximum error was 2.... ..."

TABLE III. Registration accuracy with MIBI SPECT images and MRI images from patients with brain tumors

in Robust multimodality registration for brain mapping
by Laurent Itti, Linda Chang, Jean-françois Mangin, Jacques Darcourt, Thomas Ernst

TABLE IV. Registration accuracy for HMPAO SPECT and MRI, using objective anatomical landmarks

in Robust multimodality registration for brain mapping
by Laurent Itti, Linda Chang, Jean-françois Mangin, Jacques Darcourt, Thomas Ernst

Table 6. Mean and Standard Deviation of Subjective Ratings for Each of the Test Images in Figures 25 through 29*

in • BAXTER AND SEIBERT Synthetic Aperture Radar Image Coding Synthetic Aperture Radar Image Coding
by Robert Baxter, Michael Seibert
"... In PAGE 35: ...15 for the paired test). Table6 summarizes the results of this experiment in tabular form, and Figure 30 summarizes these same results by plotting the mean subjective ratings as a function of the NMSE. The red line in Figure 30 rep- resents a least-squares regressive linear fit.... ..."

Table 1: True and Estimated Values for ( i x; i y), Simultaneous Registration and Restoration

in Reconstruction of a High Resolution Image from Multiple Degraded Mis-Registered Low Resolution Images
by Brian C. Tom, Aggelos K. Katsaggelos 1994
"... In PAGE 6: ... 2. The estimated and true values for the shifts are shown in Table1 . The top four frames of Figure 5 show the restored frames with independent registration and restoration (IRR), while the bottom four frames are those images restored by the SRR approach.... In PAGE 6: ...56 256, is shown in Fig. 6. The next two images in Fig. 7 correspond to the interpolated frames using the IRR and SRR approaches, respectively, going from left to right. In obtaining the SRR image, the true sub-pixel shifts given in Table1 were used. In all of the above experiments, lambda was set to 0.... ..."
Cited by 21

Table 1: Results of recovering the synthetic deformations. Experiment Method Mono-modality registration Multi-modality registration

in Symmetric Image Registration
by Peter Rogelj, Stanislav Kovacic 2003
"... In PAGE 8: ... Because the original images MRI-T1 and MRI-PD were in register, measure SMAD and original MRI-T1 image were used also for evaluation of the multi-modal registration results (TB). The results are tabulated in Table1 . In all the cases the symmetric approach performed best with regard to the registration correctness and registration consistency, and in general it was also best according to the image similarity.... ..."
Cited by 5

TABLE II RECONSTRUCTION PERFORMANCES OF LINEAR, ST-CS AND MT-CS ON MRI IMAGES.

in Bayesian compressive sensing
by Shihao Ji, David Dunson, Lawrence Carin 2007
Cited by 5
Next 10 →
Results 11 - 20 of 67,101
Powered by: Apache Solr
  • About CiteSeerX
  • Submit and Index Documents
  • Privacy Policy
  • Help
  • Data
  • Source
  • Contact Us

Developed at and hosted by The College of Information Sciences and Technology

© 2007-2016 The Pennsylvania State University