"... 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.... ..."

"... 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.... ..."

"... 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.... ..."

"... 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.... ..."

"... 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.... ..."

"... 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.... ..."