EN
TR
Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods
Abstract
This paper includes comparision of automatic and
interactive segmentation methods. Both methods
are used for color images segmentatiton and based Gaussian Mixture Model. In
automatic segmentation is segmented image pixels without any prior knowledge provided
by the user. Interactive segmentation needs prior knowledge provided by the user and segmentation
process are based prior knowledge. Obtained results demonstrate that
interactive segmentatiton is faster and more accure than automatic
segmentation.
Keywords
References
- [1] H. Renjini and P. Bhagavathi Sivakumar, “Comparison of Automatic and Interactive Image Segmentation Methods”, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 3162-3170, 2013.
- [2] C. M. Smith, et al. Automatic thresholding of three-dimensional microvascular structures from confocal microscopy images. J. Microscopy , 225(3):244–257, 2007.
- [3] M. Kass, A. Witkin, and D. Terzopoulos. Snakes: Active contour models. International Journal of Computer Vision, 1(4):321–331, 1987. 179.
- [4] V. Grau, A. U. J. Mewes, M. Alcaniz, R. Kikinis, and S. K. Warfield. Improved watershed transform for medical image segmentation using prior information. IEEE Trans. Med.Imag., 23(4):447–458, 2004.
- [5] A. Pitiot, A.W. Toga, N. Ayache, and P. Thompson. Texture based MRI segmentation with a two-stage hybrid neural classifier. In Proc.World Congress Computational Intelligence/INNSIEEE Int. Joint Conf. Neural Networks, pages 2053–2058, 2002.
- [6] Alasu Serdar, and Muhammed Fatih Talu. "Interactive segmentatition implementation." 2015 23nd Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU). IEEE, 2015.
- [7] Boykov Y, JollyM(2001) Interactive graph cuts for optimal boundary & region segmentation of objects in nd images. In: Proceeding of 8th IEEE international conference on computer vision, ICCV 2001, IEEE, vol 1, pp 105–112
- [8] Mortensen E, Barrett W (1998) Interactive segmentation with intelligent scissors. Graph Models Image Process 60(5):349–384
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
-
Journal Section
Research Article
Publication Date
December 1, 2016
Submission Date
April 19, 2017
Acceptance Date
November 24, 2016
Published in Issue
Year 2016 Volume: 1 Number: 1
APA
Alasu, S., & Talu, M. F. (2016). Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods. Computer Science, 1(1), 20-28. https://izlik.org/JA49MA55HU
AMA
1.Alasu S, Talu MF. Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods. JCS. 2016;1(1):20-28. https://izlik.org/JA49MA55HU
Chicago
Alasu, Serdar, and Muhammed Fatih Talu. 2016. “Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods”. Computer Science 1 (1): 20-28. https://izlik.org/JA49MA55HU.
EndNote
Alasu S, Talu MF (December 1, 2016) Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods. Computer Science 1 1 20–28.
IEEE
[1]S. Alasu and M. F. Talu, “Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods”, JCS, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 20–28, Dec. 2016, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA49MA55HU
ISNAD
Alasu, Serdar - Talu, Muhammed Fatih. “Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods”. Computer Science 1/1 (December 1, 2016): 20-28. https://izlik.org/JA49MA55HU.
JAMA
1.Alasu S, Talu MF. Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods. JCS. 2016;1:20–28.
MLA
Alasu, Serdar, and Muhammed Fatih Talu. “Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods”. Computer Science, vol. 1, no. 1, Dec. 2016, pp. 20-28, https://izlik.org/JA49MA55HU.
Vancouver
1.Serdar Alasu, Muhammed Fatih Talu. Comparision of Automatic and Interactive Segmentatition Methods. JCS [Internet]. 2016 Dec. 1;1(1):20-8. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA49MA55HU
is applied to all research papers published by JCS and 