PubMed · 14258955
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
F CISCAR. 1964. [PATHOLOGICAL ANATOMY].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14258955/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Diffuse optical tomography (DOT) poses a typical ill-posed inverse problem with a limited number of measurements and inherently low spatial resolution. In this paper, we propose a hierarchical Bayesian approach to improve spatial resolution and quantitative accuracy by using a priori information provided by a secondary high resolution anatomical imaging modality, such as magnetic resonance (MR) or x-ray. In such a dual imaging approach, while the correlation between optical and anatomical images may be high, it is not perfect. For example, a tumour may be present in the optical image, but may not be discernable in the anatomical image. The proposed hierarchical Bayesian approach allows incorporation of partial a priori knowledge about the noise and unknown optical image models, thereby capturing the function-anatomy correlation effectively. We present a computationally efficient iterative algorithm to simultaneously estimate the optical image and the unknown a priori model parameters. Extensive numerical simulations demonstrate that the proposed method avoids undesirable bias towards anatomical prior information and leads to significantly improved spatial resolution and quantitative accuracy.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
MOTIVATION: Anatomy ontologies have a growing role in bioinformatics-for example, in indexing gene expression data in model organisms. To relate or draw conclusions from data so indexed, anatomy ontologies must be equipped with the formal vocabulary that would allow statements about meronomy to be qualified by constraints such as part of the male or part at the embryonic stage. Lacking such a vocabulary, anatomists have built this information into the structure of the ontology or into anatomical terms. For example, in the FlyBase anatomy for drosophila, the term larval abdominal segment encodes the stage in the term, while the terms male genital disc and female genital disc encode the sex. It remains implicit that a fly has one and only one of these parts during its larval stage. Such indicators of context can and should be represented explicitly in the ontology. RESULTS: The framework we have defined for anatomical ontologies allows the canonical anatomy structures of a given species to be those common to all sexes, and to have either male, female or hermaphrodite parts--but not combinations of the latter. Temporal aspects of development are addressed by associating a stage with organism parts and requiring a connected anatomy to have parts that exist at a common stage. Both sex and anatomical stage are represented by attributes. This formalization clarifies ontological structure and meaning and increases the capacity for formal reasoning about anatomy. The framework also supports generalizations such as vertebrate and invertebrate, thereby allowing the representation of anatomical structures that are common across a sub-phylum.