@CONFERENCE\{IMM2006-04161,
    author       = "H. \'{O}lafsd\'{o}ttir and M. B. Stegmann and B. K. Ersb{\o}ll and H. B. Larsson",
    title        = "A Comparison of {FFD-}based Nonrigid Registration and AAMs Applied to Myocardial Perfusion {MRI}",
    year         = "2006",
    month        = "feb",
    keywords     = "Nonrigid registration, Active Appearance Models, Myocardial perfusion, Magnetic Resonance Imaging",
    booktitle    = "International Symposium on Medical Imaging 2006, San Diego, {CA}",
    volume       = "6144",
    series       = "",
    editor       = "",
    publisher    = "The International Society for Optical Engineering (SPIE)",
    organization = "",
    address      = "",
    url          = "http://www2.compute.dtu.dk/pubdb/pubs/4161-full.html",
    abstract     = "Little work has been done on comparing the performance of statistical model-based approaches and nonrigid registration algorithms. This paper deals with the qualitative and quantitative comparison of active appearance models (AAMs) and a nonrigid registration algorithm based on free-form deformations (FFDs). AAMs are known to be much faster than nonrigid registration algorithms. On the other hand nonrigid registration algorithms are independent of a training set as required to build an {AAM}. To obtain a further comparison of the two methods, they are both applied to automatically register multi-slice myocardial perfusion images. The images are acquired by magnetic resonance imaging, from infarct patients. A registration of these sequences is crucial for clinical practice, which currently is subjected to manual labor. In the paper, the pros and cons of the two registration approaches are discussed and qualitative and quantitative comparisons are provided. The quantitative comparison is obtained by an analysis of variance of landmark errors, i.e. point to point and point to curve errors. Even though the {FFD-}based approach does not include a training phase it gave similar accuracy as the AAMs in terms of point to point errors. For the point to curve errors the AAMs provided higher accuracy. In both cases AAMs gave higher precision due to the training procedure."
}