{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021632937892533146, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.638888888888889, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Quantitative Comparisons of Image Registration Techniques Based on High‐Resolution MRI of the Brain

Objective A variety of methods for matching intrasubject MRI-MRI, PET-PET, or MRI-PET image pairs have been proposed. Based on the rigid body transformations needed to align pairs of high-resolution MRI scans and/or simulated PET scans (derived from these MRI scans), we obtained general comparisons of four intrasubject image registration techniques: Talairach coordinates, head and hat, equivalent internal points, and ratio image uniformity. In addition, we obtained a comparison of stereotaxic Z frames with a customized head mold for MRI-MRI image pairs. Materials and Methods and Results Each technique was quantitatively evaluated using the mean and maximum voxel registration errors for matched voxel pairs within the brain volumes being registered. Conclusion We conclude that fiducial markers such as stereotaxic Z frames that are not rigidly fixed to a patient's skull are inaccurate compared with other registration techniques, Talairach coordinate transformations provide surprisingly good registration, and minimizing the variance of MRI-MRI, PET-PET, or MRI-PET ratio images provides significantly better registration than all other techniques tested. Registration optimization based on measurement of the similarity of spatial distributions of voxel values is superior to techniques that do not use such information.