Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1155/2015/564748

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1155/2015/564748
suck pdf from google scholar
C4667064!4667064!26664494
unlimited free pdf from europmc26664494    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

suck abstract from ncbi


Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
pmid26664494      Comput+Math+Methods+Med 2015 ; 2015 (ä): ä
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Multimodal Medical Image Fusion by Adaptive Manifold Filter #MMPMID26664494
  • Geng P; Liu S; Zhuang S
  • Comput Math Methods Med 2015[]; 2015 (ä): ä PMID26664494show ga
  • Medical image fusion plays an important role in diagnosis and treatment of diseases such as image-guided radiotherapy and surgery. The modified local contrast information is proposed to fuse multimodal medical images. Firstly, the adaptive manifold filter is introduced into filtering source images as the low-frequency part in the modified local contrast. Secondly, the modified spatial frequency of the source images is adopted as the high-frequency part in the modified local contrast. Finally, the pixel with larger modified local contrast is selected into the fused image. The presented scheme outperforms the guided filter method in spatial domain, the dual-tree complex wavelet transform-based method, nonsubsampled contourlet transform-based method, and four classic fusion methods in terms of visual quality. Furthermore, the mutual information values by the presented method are averagely 55%, 41%, and 62% higher than the three methods and those values of edge based similarity measure by the presented method are averagely 13%, 33%, and 14% higher than the three methods for the six pairs of source images.
  • ä


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box