I am attempting to spatially map the cell survival in a given scanned image of a cell flask. Quick background: the cells have received a high dose of irradiation (protons/X-rays) delivered through a grid so that some regions are covered from the irradiation, whereas other regions are not. After scanning such cell colonies, the images are then fed into a segmentation algorithm (in which I have developed using Matlab), centroid coordinates (c_i = (x_i,y_i)) of each detected viable colony are provided.
I have done this type of assessment for grid ‘stripes’, where I have counted colonies within a band along a single dimension (x) and tested for different band widths Δx (as shown in the left figure below). However, my issue is for grid ‘holes’ (see right figure below) – how can I perform the same type of assessment for cell colony survival in two dimensions (x and y) given the centroid coordinates? Do I have to “think” radially?
Thank you in advance for any guidance or help to this problem.
You are in the right direction. In the left side image the variation is along x-axis and you are using a new axis for plating efficiency (y-axis).
Similarly, for grid - you will have to introduce a new axis : z axis. Suppose your image I is 500x500 and each grid-cell is 50x50. So you will create a 10x10 grid G where each cell of G is count of centroids in one 50x50 grid cell of I.
Since visualizing a 3-D chart is difficult, people use images, where the value of z-axis is the intensity in image or the grayscale value of a grayscale image. Make sure to normalize your z-axis values on [0,1] or [0,255] range for using images as your visualization tool.
Related
I have a 3D color image. I wish to plot its principal axis and its centroid. To do that, I have extracted each of the color channels, found the centroid and then proceeded to find the covariance matrix and eigenvalue. I am unsure as to whether this will help me plot the principal axis.
My primary goal is to plot the principal axis so that I can find whether the image is symmetrical about that axis.
This is the algorithm I would like to implement.
Plot the principal axis of the image. The image is then rotated
(clockwise) to align its coordinate (𝑥 and 𝑦) axes with principal
inertia axis of the image. The image is then hypothetically folded
around the 𝑥-axis and the the sum of the absolute grey-level
difference between the corresponding pixels(𝐴 𝑥) between the
overlapping folds was taken as the amount of asymmetry on the 𝑥-axis.
The same procedure was performed for the 𝑦-axis. Two asymmetry
measures were calculated from 𝐴 𝑥 and 𝐴 𝑦 as follows:
A1 = min (𝐴
𝑥
, 𝐴
𝑦
)
𝐴
× 100%
A2 =
(𝐴
𝑥
+ 𝐴
𝑦
)
𝐴
× 100%.
The two asymmetry measures noted above (𝐴 1 and 𝐴 2) are computed
for each image channel, in the RGB colour space, resulting in the
total of six-coefficient (6D) colour asymmetry feature.
How do I plot the principal axis? I tried using regionprops function in MATLAB to plot the major axis, minor axis, centroid and orientation but I am unsure if this is the right approach. Should I use PCA?
Can I overlap the image using the fliplr function?
What do they mean same procedure for y-axis? If an image is asymmetrical over one axis then doesn't it mean its asymmetrical over the y-axis too?
I am unable to implement this algorithm. Please guide on how to code this in MATLAB.
https://in.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/266988-how-to-flip-a-segmented-image-along-the-major-axis#answer_208875
This is a partial answer to my query but I am stuck at the initial part. How do I find the major axis and align in with the axes using imtranslate()?
I have a list of triangles in 3D that form a surface (ie a triangulation). The structure is a deformed triangular lattice. I want to know the change in area of the deformed hexagons of the voronoi tessalation of the lattice with respect to the rest area of the undeformed lattice cells (ie with respect to a regular hexagon). In fact, I really want the sum of the squared change in area of the hexagonal unit cells associated with those triangles.
Background/Math details:
I'm approximating a curved elastic sheet by a triangular lattice. One way to tune the poisson ratio (elastic constant) of the sheet is by adding a 'volumetric' strain energy term to the energy. I'm trying to compute a 'volumetric' strain energy of a deformed, elastic, triangular lattice, defined as: U_volumetric = 1/2 T (e_v)^2, where e_v=deltaV/V is determined by the change in area of a voronoi cell with respect to its reference area, which is a known constant.
Reference: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265853755_Finite_element_implementation_of_a_non-local_particle_method_for_elasticity_and_fracture_analysis
Want:
Sum[ (DeltaA/ A).^2 ] over all hexagonal cells.
My data is stored in the variables:
xyz = [ x1,y1,z1; x2,y2,z2; etc] %the vertices/particles in 3D
TRI = [ vertex0, vertex1, vertex2; etc] %
where vertex0 is the row of xyz for the particle sitting at vertex 0 of the first triangle.
NeighborList = [ p1n1, p1n2, p1n3, p1n4, p1n5,p1n6 ; p2n1...]
% where p1n1 is particle 1's first nearest neighbor as a row index for xyz. For example, xyz(NL(1,1),:) returns the xyz location of particle 1's first neighbor.
AreaTRI = [ areaTRI1; areaTRI2; etc]
I am writing this in MATLAB.
As of now, I am approximating the amount of area attributed to each vertex as 1/3 of the triangle's area, then summing over the 6 nearest neighbor triangles. But a voronoi cell area will NOT be exactly equal to Sum_(i=0,1,...5) 1/3* areaTRI_i, so this is a bad approximation. See the image in the link above, which I think makes this clearer.
You can do this using the DUALMESH-submission on the file exchange:
DUALMESH is a toolbox of mesh processing routines that allow the construction of "dual" meshes based on underlying simplicial triangulations. Support is provided for various planar and surface triangulation types, including non-Delaunay and non-manifold types.
Simply use the following commands to generate a vector areas of all the dual elements' areas. The ordering will correspond to the nodes xyz.
[cp,ce,pv,ev] = makedual2(xyz, TRI);
[~,areas(cp(:,1))] = geomdual2(cp,ce,pv,ev);
You might want to have a look at the boundary areas using:
trisurf(TRI, xyz(:,1), xyz(:,2), areas);
The dual cells of boundary nodes theoretically are unbounded and thus should have infinite area. This submission handles it differently however: Instead of an unbounded cell it will return the intersection of the unbounded cell with the original mesh.
Also mind that your question is not well defined if the mesh you are working with is not planar, as the dual mesh cells will be planar and won't scale the same way as the triangles. So this solution will probably only work correctly if your mesh is really 2D. (From what I can tell, the paper you mention is also only for the 2D-case.)
I have two images(both are exactly same images) and I am trying to calculate the disparity between them using sum of squared distances and reconstruct disparity in 3D space.
Do I need to rectify the image before calculating disparity?
The following are the steps that I have done so far for disparity map computation(I have tried with rectification and without rectification but both are returning all zeroes disparity matrix).
For each pixel in the left image X,
Take the pixels in the same row in the right image.
Separate the row in right image to windows.
For each window,
Calculate the disparity for each pixel in that window with X
Select the pixel in the window which gives minimum SSD with X
Find the pixel with minimum disparity among all windows as the best match to X
Am I doing it correctly?
How can I visualise the 3D reconstruction of the disparity as scatter plot in matlab?
Rectification guarantees that matches are to be found in the same row (for horizontally separated cameras). If you have doubts about rectification of your images you can try to compare rows by drawing horizontal lines between horizontally separated images. If the lines hit the same features you are fine, see the picture below where images are NOT rectified. The fact that they are distorted means there was a lens distortion correction as well as attempted (but not actually performed correctly) rectification.
Now, let’s see what you meant by the same images. Did you mean the images of the same object that were taken from different viewpoints? Note that if the images are literally the same (the same viewpoints) the disparity will be zero as was noted in another answer. The definition of disparity (for horizontally separated cameras) is a value of shift (in the same row) between matching features. The disparity is related to depth (if optical axes of cameras are parallel) as disparity d=f*B/z, where z - depth, B - baseline or separation between cameras and f is a focal length. You can transform the formula above into disparity/B=f/z which basically says that disparity related to camera separation as focal length is related to distance. In other words, the ratios of horizontal and distance measures are equal.
If your images are taken with the cameras shifted horizontally the disparity (in a simple correlation algorithm) is typically calculated in 5-embedded loops:
loop over image1 y
loop over image1 x
loop over disparity d
loop over correlation window y
loop over correlation window x
Disparity, or D_best, gives you the best matching window between image1 and image2 across all possible values of d. Finally, scatterplots are for 3D point clouds while disparity can be rather visualized as a heat color map. If you need to visualize 3D reconstruction or simply saying a 3D point cloud calculate X, Y, Z as:
Z=fB/D, X=uZ/f, Y=v*Z/f, where u and v are related to column and row of wxh image as
u=col-w/2 and v=h/2-row, that is u, v form an image centered coordinate system.
If your two images are exactly the same, then the disparity would be 0 for every pixel. You either have to use two separate cameras to take the images, or take them with a single camera from two different locations. The best way to do 3D reconstruction is to use a calibrated stereo pair of cameras. Here is an example of how to do that using the Computer Vision System Toolbox for MATLAB.
i have to do super resolution of two low resolution images to obtain a high resolution image.
2nd image is taken as base image and the first image is registered with respect to it . i used SURF algorithm for image registration . A Delaunay triangulation is constructed over the points using a built-in MATLAB delaunay function . The HR grid of size is constructed for a prespecified resolution enhancement factor R Then HR algorithm for interpolating the pixel values on the HR grid is summarized next.
HR Algorithm Steps: 1. Construct the Delaunay triangulation over the set of scattered vertices in the irregularly sampled raster formed from the LR frames.
Estimate the gradient vector at each vertex of the triangulation by calculating the unit normal vector of neighbouring vector using cross product method.Sum of the unit normal vector of each triangle multiplied by its area is divided by summation of area of all neighbouring triangles to get the vertex normal.
Approximate each triangle patch in the triangulation by a continuous and, possibly, a continuously differentiable surface, subject to some smoothness constraint. Bivariate polynomials or splines could be the approximants as explained below.
Set the resolution enhancement factor along the horizontal and vertical directions and then calculate the pixel value at each regularly spaced HR grid point to construct the initial HR image
now i have the results shown below
now for one kind of data set i get this result that has a few pixels black and wite in a random manner for the other type i get thin parallel lines all over image after super resolution the results are attached
any one can tell me the reason, i have figured out may be its demosaicing but i am not sure,because i dnt have much understanding of it , moreover can it be a bug in my code but it behaves different for different images, i have increased the size by super resolution twice.
Simple rounded corner rectangle code in Matlab can be written as follows.
rectangle('Position',[0,-1.37/2,3.75,1.37],...
'Curvature',[1],...
'LineWidth',1,'LineStyle','-')
daspect([1,1,1])
How to get the x and y coordinates arrays of this figure?
To get the axes units boundaries, do:
axisUnits = axis(axesHandle) % axesHandle could be gca
axisUnits will be an four elements array, with the following syntax: [xlowlim xhighlim ylowlim yhighlim], it will also contain the zlow and zhigh for 3-D plots.
But I think that is not what you need to know. Checking the matlab documentation for the rectangle properties, we find:
Position four-element vector [x,y,width,height]
Location and size of rectangle. Specifies the location and size of the
rectangle in the data units of the axes. The point defined by x, y
specifies one corner of the rectangle, and width and height define the
size in units along the x- and y-axes respectively.
It is also documented on the rectangle documentation:
rectangle('Position',[x,y,w,h]) draws the rectangle from the point x,y
and having a width of w and a height of h. Specify values in axes data
units.
See if this illustrate what you want. You have an x axis that goes from −100 to 100 and y axis that goes from 5 to 15. Suppose you want to put a rectangle from −30 to −20 in x and 8 to 10 in y.
rectangle('Position',[-30,8,10,2]);
As explained by the comments there appears to be no direct way to query the figure created by rectangle and extract x/y coordinates. On the other hand, I can think of two simple strategies to arrive at coordinates that will closely reproduce the curve generated with rectangle:
(1) Save the figure as an image (say .png) and process the image to extract points corresponding to the curve. Some degree of massaging is necessary but this is relatively straightforward if blunt and I expect the code to be somewhat slow at execution compared to getting data from an axes object.
(2) Write your own code to draw a rectangle with curved edges. While recreating precisely what matlab draws may not be so simple, you may be satisfied with your own version.
Whether you choose one of these approaches boils down to (a) what speed of execution you consider acceptable (b) how closely you need to replicate what rectangle draws on screen (c) whether you have image processing routines, say for reading an image file.
Edit
If you have the image processing toolbox you can arrive at a set of points representing the rectangle as follows:
h=rectangle('Position',[0,-1.37/2,3.75,1.37],...
'Curvature',[1],...
'LineWidth',1,'LineStyle','-')
daspect([1,1,1])
axis off
saveas(gca,'test.png');
im = imread('test.png');
im = rgb2gray(im);
figure, imshow(im)
Note that you will still need to apply a threshold to pick the relevant points from the image and then transform the coordinate system and rearrange the points in order to display properly as a connected set. You'll probably also want to tinker with resolution of the initial image file or apply image processing functions to get a smooth curve.