By Topic

Segmentation of Complementary DNA Microarray Images by Wavelet-Based Markov Random Field Model

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

6 Author(s)
Emmanouil I. Athanasiadis ; Med. Image Process. & Anal. Group, Univ. of Patras, Rio Patras, Greece ; Dionisis A. Cavouras ; Dimitris Th. Glotsos ; Pantelis V. Georgiadis
more authors

A wavelet-based modification of the Markov random field (WMRF) model is proposed for segmenting complementary DNA (cDNA) microarray images. For evaluation purposes, five simulated and a set of five real microarray images were used. The one-level stationary wavelet transform (SWT) of each microarray image was used to form two images, a denoised image, using hard thresholding filter, and a magnitude image, from the amplitudes of the horizontal and vertical components of SWT. Elements from these two images were suitably combined to form the WMRF model for segmenting spots from their background. The WMRF was compared against the conventional MRF and the Fuzzy C means (FCM) algorithms on simulated and real microarray images and their performances were evaluated by means of the segmentation matching factor (SMF) and the coefficient of determination (r 2). Additionally, the WMRF was compared against the SPOT and SCANALYZE, and performances were evaluated by the mean absolute error (MAE) and the coefficient of variation (CV). The WMRF performed more accurately than the MRF and FCM (SMF: 92.66, 92.15, and 89.22, r 2 : 0.92, 0.90, and 0.84, respectively) and achieved higher reproducibility than the MRF, SPOT, and SCANALYZE (MAE: 497, 1215, 1180, and 503, CV: 0.88, 1.15, 0.93, and 0.90, respectively).

Published in:

IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine  (Volume:13 ,  Issue: 6 )