2019
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-32251-9_29
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multiple Landmark Detection Using Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning

Abstract: The detection of anatomical landmarks is a vital step for medical image analysis and applications for diagnosis, interpretation and guidance. Manual annotation of landmarks is a tedious process that requires domain-specific expertise and introduces inter-observer variability. This paper proposes a new detection approach for multiple landmarks based on multi-agent reinforcement learning. Our hypothesis is that the position of all anatomical landmarks is interdependent and nonrandom within the human anatomy, thu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Even so, establishing an effective decision space and award function that reliably converges is non-trivial for DRL approaches in dynamic environments, and is especially a barrier for using such agents where consistently accurate and safe results are required (Dulac-Arnold et al, 2019). A multi-agent collaborative DRL approach, introduced in 2019, achieved an average localization error of 0.93 ± 0.18 and 1.05 ± 0.25 mm for AC and PC points, respectively (Vlontzos et al, 2019). Although our current supervised deep learning approach is more accurate, there is an acceleration of innovation in DRL methods and such artificial agents are expected to improve through experience as they navigate through more neuroimaging data, such as our ACPC-MRI -1 and ACPC-MRI-2 datasets.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even so, establishing an effective decision space and award function that reliably converges is non-trivial for DRL approaches in dynamic environments, and is especially a barrier for using such agents where consistently accurate and safe results are required (Dulac-Arnold et al, 2019). A multi-agent collaborative DRL approach, introduced in 2019, achieved an average localization error of 0.93 ± 0.18 and 1.05 ± 0.25 mm for AC and PC points, respectively (Vlontzos et al, 2019). Although our current supervised deep learning approach is more accurate, there is an acceleration of innovation in DRL methods and such artificial agents are expected to improve through experience as they navigate through more neuroimaging data, such as our ACPC-MRI -1 and ACPC-MRI-2 datasets.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, they evaluate several Q-Learning approaches as there are Double, Dueling and Dueling Double Q-Learning. A variant of their approach towards automatic view planning is shown in [1] and an extension towards the detection of multiple landmarks simultaneously in [15].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The recent success of RL in the field of landmark localization [2,[5][6][7]15] in combination with the ability of RL agents to adapt to a specific environment, encouraged us to transfer this approach for landmark redetection to pre-and post-operative brain images. Furthermore, RL has the benefit of being able to perform on limited training data, which is crucial for our task.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A multi-scale strategy [6] and hierarchical action steps [1] have been proposed to further improve the performance of this approach. For the detection of multiple landmarks, [17] proposed a collaborative DQN based on concurrent Partially Observable Markov Decision Process [7]. However, the physical structure and communications among agents are not taken into consideration during decision making.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, most landmark-searching DRL only adopt an immediate reward based on the distance between the agent and its target landmark [1,5,6,17]. The smallest and most peripheral joints, i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%