These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27341493)

  • 21. Rectangular-Normalized Superpixel Entropy Index for Image Quality Assessment.
    Lu T; Wang J; Zhou H; Jiang J; Ma J; Wang Z
    Entropy (Basel); 2018 Dec; 20(12):. PubMed ID: 33266671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Modified-BRISQUE as no reference image quality assessment for structural MR images.
    Chow LS; Rajagopal H
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2017 Nov; 43():74-87. PubMed ID: 28716679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Fine-Grained Quality Assessment for Compressed Images.
    Zhang X; Lin W; Wang S; Liu J; Ma S; Gao W
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2019 Mar; 28(3):1163-1175. PubMed ID: 30296227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. No-reference image quality assessment using visual codebooks.
    Ye P; Doermann D
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2012 Jul; 21(7):3129-38. PubMed ID: 22410336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Objective Quality Assessment of Interpolated Natural Images.
    Yeganeh H; Rostami M; Wang Z
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2015 Nov; 24(11):4651-63. PubMed ID: 26186792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Perceptual Quality Assessment for Multi-Exposure Image Fusion.
    Ma K; Zeng K; Wang Z
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2015 Nov; 24(11):3345-56. PubMed ID: 26068317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Super Resolution Image Visual Quality Assessment Based on Feature Optimization.
    Lei S; Zijian H; Jiebin Y; Fengchang F
    Comput Intell Neurosci; 2022; 2022():1263348. PubMed ID: 35769272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Universal blind image quality assessment metrics via natural scene statistics and multiple kernel learning.
    Gao X; Gao F; Tao D; Li X
    IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst; 2013 Dec; 24(12):2013-26. PubMed ID: 24805219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. No-reference image quality assessment for confocal endoscopy images with perceptual local descriptor.
    Dong X; Fu L; Liu Q
    J Biomed Opt; 2022 May; 27(5):. PubMed ID: 35585672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Image quality assessment based on multiscale geometric analysis.
    Gao X; Lu W; Tao D; Li X
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2009 Jul; 18(7):1409-23. PubMed ID: 19447715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of Full-Reference Image Quality Models for Optimization of Image Processing Systems.
    Ding K; Ma K; Wang S; Simoncelli EP
    Int J Comput Vis; 2021; 129(4):1258-1281. PubMed ID: 33495671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A feature-enriched completely blind image quality evaluator.
    Lin Zhang ; Lei Zhang ; Bovik AC
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2015 Aug; 24(8):2579-91. PubMed ID: 25915960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Automated quantification and evaluation of motion artifact on coronary CT angiography images.
    Ma H; Gros E; Baginski SG; Laste ZR; Kulkarni NM; Okerlund D; Schmidt TG
    Med Phys; 2018 Dec; 45(12):5494-5508. PubMed ID: 30339290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 3D-MAD: A Full Reference Stereoscopic Image Quality Estimator Based on Binocular Lightness and Contrast Perception.
    Zhang Y; Chandler DM
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2015 Nov; 24(11):3810-25. PubMed ID: 26186775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A novel algorithm for comprehensive quality assessment of clinical magnetic resonance images based on natural scene statistics in spatial domain.
    Ikushima Y; Tokurei S; Tarewaki H; Morishita J; Yabuuchi H
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2022 Oct; 92():203-211. PubMed ID: 35842195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. An evolutionary approach for image segmentation.
    Amelio A; Pizzuti C
    Evol Comput; 2014; 22(4):525-57. PubMed ID: 24256513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Subjective and Objective Quality Assessment of Swimming Pool Images.
    Lei F; Li S; Xie S; Liu J
    Front Neurosci; 2021; 15():766762. PubMed ID: 35087371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Performance evaluation of image segmentation algorithms on microscopic image data.
    Beneš M; Zitová B
    J Microsc; 2015 Jan; 257(1):65-85. PubMed ID: 25233873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Perceptual quality metric with internal generative mechanism.
    Wu J; Lin W; Shi G; Liu A
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2013 Jan; 22(1):43-54. PubMed ID: 22910116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Quantifying Visual Image Quality: A Bayesian View.
    Duanmu Z; Liu W; Wang Z; Wang Z
    Annu Rev Vis Sci; 2021 Sep; 7():437-464. PubMed ID: 34348034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.