Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics
Volume 34, Issue 3 , Pages 185-191, April 2010

A comparison of two methods for the segmentation of masses in the digital mammograms

  • R.B. Dubey

      Affiliations

    • Apeejay College of Eng., ICE Dept., Sohna, Gurgaon, India
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +91 0129 4102114.
  • ,
  • M. Hanmandlu

      Affiliations

    • Electrical Eng. Dept., IIT, New Delhi, India
  • ,
  • S.K. Gupta

      Affiliations

    • Electrical Eng. Dept., DCRUST, Murthal, Sonepat, India

Received 30 October 2008; received in revised form 21 July 2009; accepted 14 September 2009.

Abstract 

An accurate and standardized technique for breast tumor segmentation is a critical step for monitoring and quantifying breast cancer. The fully automated tumor segmentation in mammograms presents many challenges related to characteristics of an image. In this paper, a comparison of two different semi-automated methods, viz., level set and marker controlled watershed methods that perform an accurate and fast segmentation of tumor is made. The robustness of the proposed methods is demonstrated by the segmentation of a set of 17 mammogram images. Numerical validation of the results is also provided.

Keywords: Breast cancer, Malignant breast masses, Digital mammograms, Level set segmentation and marker controlled watershed segmentation

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0895-6111(09)00113-X

doi:10.1016/j.compmedimag.2009.09.002

Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics
Volume 34, Issue 3 , Pages 185-191, April 2010