The most common imaging methods used in dentistry are X-ray imaging and RGB color photography. However, both imaging methods provide only a limited amount of information on the wavelength-dependent optical properties of the hard and soft tissues in the mouth. Spectral imaging, on the other hand, provides significantly more information on the medically relevant dental and oral features (e.g. caries, calculus, and gingivitis). Due to this, we constructed a spectral imaging setup and acquired 316 oral and dental reflectance spectral images, 215 of which are annotated by medical experts, of 30 human test subjects. Spectral images of the subjects’ faces and other areas of interest were captured, along with other medically relevant information (e.g., pulse and blood pressure). We collected these oral, dental, and face spectral images, their annotations and metadata into a publicly available database that we describe in this paper. This oral and dental spectral image database (ODSI-DB) provides a vast amount of data that can be used for developing, e.g., pattern recognition and machine vision applications for dentistry.

Retinal blood vessel structure is an important indicator of many retinal and systemic diseases, which has motivated the development of various image segmentation methods for the blood vessels. In this study, two supervised and three unsupervised segmentation methods with a publicly available implementation are reviewed and quantitatively compared with each other on five public databases with ground truth segmentation of the vessels. Each method is tested under consistent conditions with two types of preprocessing, and the parameters of the methods are optimized for each database. Additionally, possibility to predict the parameters of the methods by the linear regression model is tested for each database. Resolution of the input images and amount of the vessel pixels in the ground truth are used as predictors. The results show the positive influence of preprocessing on the performance of the unsupervised methods. The methods show similar performance for segmentation accuracy, with the best performance achieved by the method by Azzopardi et al. (Acc 94.0) on ARIADB, the method by Soares et al. (Acc 94.6, 94.7) on CHASEDB1 and DRIVE, and the method by Nguyen et al. (Acc 95.8, 95.5) on HRF and STARE. The method by Soares et al. performed better with regard to the area under the ROC curve. Qualitative differences between the methods are discussed. Finally, it was possible to predict the parameter settings that give performance close to the optimized performance of each method.

No abstract