Research article Special Issues

Enhancement of cone beam CT image registration by super-resolution pre-processing algorithm


  • Received: 10 October 2022 Revised: 16 November 2022 Accepted: 16 November 2022 Published: 23 December 2022
  • In order to enhance cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image information and improve the registration accuracy for image-guided radiation therapy, we propose a super-resolution (SR) image enhancement method. This method uses super-resolution techniques to pre-process the CBCT prior to registration. Three rigid registration methods (rigid transformation, affine transformation, and similarity transformation) and a deep learning deformed registration (DLDR) method with and without SR were compared. The five evaluation indices, the mean squared error (MSE), mutual information, Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC), structural similarity index (SSIM), and PCC + SSIM, were used to validate the results of registration with SR. Moreover, the proposed method SR-DLDR was also compared with the VoxelMorph (VM) method. In rigid registration with SR, the registration accuracy improved by up to 6% in the PCC metric. In DLDR with SR, the registration accuracy was improved by up to 5% in PCC + SSIM. When taking the MSE as the loss function, the accuracy of SR-DLDR is equivalent to that of the VM method. In addition, when taking the SSIM as the loss function, the registration accuracy of SR-DLDR is 6% higher than that of VM. SR is a feasible method to be used in medical image registration for planning CT (pCT) and CBCT. The experimental results show that the SR algorithm can improve the accuracy and efficiency of CBCT image alignment regardless of which alignment algorithm is used.

    Citation: Liwei Deng, Yuanzhi Zhang, Jingjing Qi, Sijuan Huang, Xin Yang, Jing Wang. Enhancement of cone beam CT image registration by super-resolution pre-processing algorithm[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(3): 4403-4420. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023204

    Related Papers:

    [1] Chenxu Yang, Meng Ji, Kinkar Chandra Das, Yaping Mao . Extreme graphs on the Sombor indices. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 19126-19146. doi: 10.3934/math.20221050
    [2] Fan Wu, Xinhui An, Baoyindureng Wu . Sombor indices of cacti. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1550-1565. doi: 10.3934/math.2023078
    [3] Zhenhua Su, Zikai Tang . Extremal unicyclic and bicyclic graphs of the Euler Sombor index. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 6338-6354. doi: 10.3934/math.2025289
    [4] Zenan Du, Lihua You, Hechao Liu, Yufei Huang . The Sombor index and coindex of two-trees. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 18982-18994. doi: 10.3934/math.2023967
    [5] Akbar Ali, Sadia Noureen, Akhlaq A. Bhatti, Abeer M. Albalahi . On optimal molecular trees with respect to Sombor indices. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 5369-5390. doi: 10.3934/math.2023270
    [6] Yufei Huang, Hechao Liu . Bounds of modified Sombor index, spectral radius and energy. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(10): 11263-11274. doi: 10.3934/math.2021653
    [7] Akbar Ali, Ivan Gutman, Boris Furtula, Abeer M. Albalahi, Amjad E. Hamza . On chemical and mathematical characteristics of generalized degree–based molecular descriptors. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 6788-6804. doi: 10.3934/math.2025311
    [8] Xiuwen Wang, Maoqun Wang . Sombor index of uniform hypergraphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 30174-30185. doi: 10.3934/math.20241457
    [9] Damchaa Adiyanyam, Enkhbayar Azjargal, Lkhagva Buyantogtokh . Bond incident degree indices of stepwise irregular graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 8685-8700. doi: 10.3934/math.2022485
    [10] Sumaira Hafeez, Rashid Farooq . On generalized inverse sum indeg index and energy of graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(3): 2388-2411. doi: 10.3934/math.2020158
  • In order to enhance cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image information and improve the registration accuracy for image-guided radiation therapy, we propose a super-resolution (SR) image enhancement method. This method uses super-resolution techniques to pre-process the CBCT prior to registration. Three rigid registration methods (rigid transformation, affine transformation, and similarity transformation) and a deep learning deformed registration (DLDR) method with and without SR were compared. The five evaluation indices, the mean squared error (MSE), mutual information, Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC), structural similarity index (SSIM), and PCC + SSIM, were used to validate the results of registration with SR. Moreover, the proposed method SR-DLDR was also compared with the VoxelMorph (VM) method. In rigid registration with SR, the registration accuracy improved by up to 6% in the PCC metric. In DLDR with SR, the registration accuracy was improved by up to 5% in PCC + SSIM. When taking the MSE as the loss function, the accuracy of SR-DLDR is equivalent to that of the VM method. In addition, when taking the SSIM as the loss function, the registration accuracy of SR-DLDR is 6% higher than that of VM. SR is a feasible method to be used in medical image registration for planning CT (pCT) and CBCT. The experimental results show that the SR algorithm can improve the accuracy and efficiency of CBCT image alignment regardless of which alignment algorithm is used.



    Topological indices have become an important research topic associated with the study of their mathematical and computational properties and, fundamentally, for their multiple applications to various areas of knowledge (see, e.g., [1,2,3]). Within the study of mathematical properties, we will contribute to the study of inequalities and optimization problems associated with topological indices. Our main goals are the Sombor indices, introduced by Gutman in [4].

    In what follows, G=(V(G),E(G)) will be a finite undirected graph, and we will assume that each vertex has at least a neighbor. We denote by dw the degree of the vertex w, i.e., the number of neighbors of w. We denote by uv the edge joining the vertices u and v (or v and u). For each graph G, its Sombor index is

    SO(G)=uvE(G)du2+dv2.

    In the same paper is also defined the reduced Sombor index by

    SOred(G)=uvE(G)(du1)2+(dv1)2.

    In [5] it is shown that these indices have a good predictive potential.

    Also, the modified Sombor index of G was proposed in [6] as

    mSO(G)=uvE(G)1du2+dv2. (1.1)

    In addition, two other Sombor indices have been introduced: the first Banhatti-Sombor index [7]

    BSO(G)=uvE(G)1du2+1dv2 (1.2)

    and the α-Sombor index [8]

    SOα(G)=uvE(G)(duα+dvα)1/α, (1.3)

    here αR{0}. In fact, there is a general index that includes most Sombor indices listed above: the first (α,β)KA index of G which was introduced in [9] as

    KAα,β(G)=KAα,β1(G)=uvE(G)(duα+dvα)β, (1.4)

    with α,βR. Note that SO(G)=KA2,1/2(G), mSO(G)=KA2,1/2(G), BSO(G)=KA2,1/2(G), and SOα(G)=KAα,1/α(G). Also, we note that KA1,β(G) equals the general sum-connectivity index [10] χβ(G)=uvE(G)(du+dv)β. Reduced versions of SO(G), mSO(G) and KAα,β(G) were also introduced in [4,6,11], e.g., the reduced (α,β)KA index is

    redKAα,β(G)=uvE(G)((du1)α+(dv1)α)β.

    If α<0, then redKAα,β(G) is just defined for graphs without pendant vertices (recall that a vertex is said pendant if its degree is equal to 1).

    Since I. Gutman initiated the study of the mathematical properties of Sombor index in [4], many papers have continued this study, see e.g., [12,13,14,15,16,17,18].

    Our main aim is to obtain new bounds of Sombor indices, and to characterize the graphs where equality occurs. In particular, we have obtained bounds for Sombor indices relating them with the first Zagreb index, the forgotten index and the first variable Zagreb index. Also, we solve some extremal problems for Sombor indices.

    The following inequalities are known for x,y>0:

    xa+ya<(x+y)a2a1(xa+ya)if a>1,2a1(xa+ya)(x+y)a<xa+yaif 0<a<1,(x+y)a2a1(xa+ya)if a<0,

    and the second, third or fifth equality is attained for each a if and only if x=y. These inequalities allow to obtain the following result relating KA indices.

    Theorem 1. Let G be any graph and α,β,λR{0}.Then

    KAαβ/λ,λ(G)<KAα,β(G)2βλKAαβ/λ,λ(G)if β>λ,βλ>0,2βλKAαβ/λ,λ(G)KAα,β(G)<KAαβ/λ,λ(G)if β<λ,βλ>0,KAα,β(G)2βλKAαβ/λ,λ(G)if β<0,λ>0,KAα,β(G)2βλKAαβ/λ,λ(G)if β>0,λ<0,

    and the second, third, fifth or sixth equality is attained for each α,β,λ if and only if all the connected components of G are regular graphs.

    Proof. If a=β/λ, x=duα and y=dvα, then the previous inequalities give

    duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ<(duα+dvα)β/λ2β/λ1(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)if β/λ>1,2β/λ1(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)(duα+dvα)β/λ<duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λif 0<β/λ<1,(duα+dvα)β/λ2β/λ1(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)if β/λ<0,

    and the second, third or fifth equality is attained if and only if du=dv.

    Hence, we obtain

    (duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λ<(duα+dvα)β2βλ(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λif β/λ>1,λ>0,2βλ(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λ(duα+dvα)β<(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λif β/λ>1,λ<0,2βλ(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λ(duα+dvα)β<(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λif 0<β/λ<1,λ>0,(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λ<(duα+dvα)β2βλ(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λif 0<β/λ<1,λ<0,(duα+dvα)β2βλ(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λif β<0,λ>0,(duα+dvα)β2βλ(duαβ/λ+dvαβ/λ)λif β>0,λ<0,

    and the equality in the non-strict inequalities is tight if and only if du=dv.

    If we sum on uvE(G) these inequalities, then we obtain (1).

    Remark 2. Note that the excluded case β=λ in Theorem 1 is not interesting, since KAαβ/λ,λ(G)=KAα,β(G) if β=λ.

    The argument in the proof of Theorem 1 also allows to obtain the following result relating reduced KA indices.

    Theorem 3. Let G be any graph and α,β,λR{0}.If α<0 or αβλ<0, we also assume that G does not have pendant vertices.Then

    redKAαβ/λ,λ(G)<redKAα,β(G)2βλredKAαβ/λ,λ(G)if β>λ,βλ>0,2βλredKAαβ/λ,λ(G)redKAα,β(G)<redKAαβ/λ,λ(G)if β<λ,βλ>0,redKAα,β(G)2βλredKAαβ/λ,λ(G)if β<0,λ>0,redKAα,β(G)2βλredKAαβ/λ,λ(G)if β>0,λ<0,

    and the second, third, fifth or sixth equality is attained for each α,β,λ if and only if all the connected components of G are regular graphs.

    If we take β=1/α and μ=1/λ in Theorem 1, we obtain the following inequalities for the α-Sombor index.

    Corollary 4. Let G be any graph and α,μR{0}.Then

    SOμ(G)<SOα(G)21/α1/μSOμ(G)if μ>α,αμ>0,21/α1/μSOμ(G)SOα(G)<SOμ(G)if μ<α,αμ>0,SOα(G)21/α1/μSOμ(G)if α<0,μ>0,

    and the second, third or fifth equality is attained for each α,μ if and only if all the connected components of G are regular graphs.

    Recall that one of the most studied topological indices is the first Zagreb index, defined by

    M1(G)=uV(G)du2.

    If we take μ=1 in Corollary 4, we obtain the following result.

    Corollary 5. Let G be any graph and αR{0}.Then

    M1(G)<SOα(G)21/α1M1(G)if 0<α<1,21/α1M1(G)SOα(G)<M1(G)if α>1,SOα(G)21/α1M1(G)if α<0,

    and the second, third or fifth equality is attained for each α if and only if all the connected components of G are regular graphs.

    If we take α=2, β=1/2 and λ=1/2 in Theorem 1, we obtain the following inequality relating the modified Sombor and the first Banhatti-Sombor indices.

    Corollary 6. Let G be any graph.Then

    mSO(G)12BSO(G)

    and the bound is tight if and only if all the connected components of G are regular graphs

    In [19,20,21], the first variable Zagreb index is defined by

    M1α(G)=uV(G)duα,

    with αR.

    Note that M1α generalizes numerous degree–based topological indices which earlier have independently been studied. For α=2, α=3, α=1/2, and α=1, M1α is, respectively, the ordinary first Zagreb index M1, the forgotten index F, the zeroth–order Randić index 0R, and the inverse index ID [2,22].

    The next result relates the KAα,β and M1α+1 indices.

    Theorem 7. Let G be any graph with maximum degree Δ, minimum degree δ and m edges, and αR{0}, β>0.Then

    KAα,β(G)(M1α+1(G)+2Δα/2δα/2m2(Δα/2+δα/2))2βif 0<β<1/2,KAα,β(G)(M1α+1(G)+2Δα/2δα/2m2(Δα/2+δα/2))2βm12βif β1/2,

    and the second equality is attained for some α,β if and only if G is a regular graph.

    Proof. If uvE(G) and α>0, then

    2δα/2duα+dvα2Δα/2.

    If α<0, then the converse inequalities hold. Hence,

    (duα+dvα2δα/2)(2Δα/2duα+dvα)0,2(Δα/2+δα/2)duα+dvαduα+dvα+2Δα/2δα/2.

    Since

    uvE(G)(duα+dvα)=uV(G)duduα=uV(G)duα+1=M1α+1(G),

    If 0<β<1/2, then 1/(2β)>1 and

    uvE(G)duα+dvα=uvE(G)((duα+dvα)β)1/(2β)(uvE(G)(duα+dvα)β)1/(2β)=KAα,β(G)1/(2β).

    Consequently, we obtain

    KAα,β(G)1/(2β)M1α+1(G)+2Δα/2δα/2m2(Δα/2+δα/2).

    If β1/2, then 2β1 and Hölder inequality gives

    uvE(G)duα+dvα=uvE(G)((duα+dvα)β)1/(2β)(uvE(G)(duα+dvα)β)1/(2β)(uvE(G)12β/(2β1))(2β1)/(2β)=m(2β1)/(2β)KAα,β(G)1/(2β).

    Consequently, we obtain

    KAα,β(G)1/(2β)M1α+1(G)+2Δα/2δα/2m2(Δα/2+δα/2)m(12β)/(2β).

    If G is regular, then

    (M1α+1(G)+2Δα/2δα/2m2(Δα/2+δα/2))2βm12β=(2Δαm+2Δαm22Δα/2)2βm12β=(2Δα/2m)2βm12β=(2Δα)βm=KAα,β(G).

    If the second equality is attained for some α,β, then we have duα+dvα=2δα or duα+dvα=2Δα for each uvE(G). Also, the equality in Hölder inequality gives that there exists a constant c such that duα+dvα=c for every uvE(G). Hence, we have either duα+dvα=2δα for each edge uv or duα+dvα=2Δα for each edge uv, and hence, G is regular.

    If we take α=2 and β=1/2 in Theorem 7 we obtain:

    Corollary 8. Let G be any graph with maximum degree Δ and minimum degree δ, and m edges.Then

    SO(G)F(G)+2Δδm2(Δ+δ),

    and the bound is tight if and only if G is regular.

    In order to prove Theorem 10 below we need an additional technical result. A converse of Hölder inequality appears in [23,Theorem 3], which, in the discrete case, can be stated as follows [23,Corollay 2].

    Proposition 9. Consider constants 0<αβ and 1<p,q< with 1/p+1/q=1.If wk,zk0 satisfy αzkqwkpβzkq for 1kn, then

    (k=1nwkp)1/p(k=1nzkq)1/qCp(α,β)k=1nwkzk,

    where

    Cp(α,β)={1p(αβ)1/(2q)+1q(βα)1/(2p),when  1<p<2,1p(βα)1/(2q)+1q(αβ)1/(2p),when  p2.

    If (w1,,wn)0, then the bound is tight if and only if wkp=αzkqfor each 1kn and α=β.

    Recall that a bipartite graph with X and Y partitions is called (a,b)-biregular if all vertices of X have degree a and all vertices of Y have degree b.

    The next result relates several KA indices.

    Theorem 10. Let G be any graph, α,β,μR and p>1.Then

    DppKAα,p(βμ)(G)KAα,pμ/(p1)(G)p1KAα,β(G)pKAα,p(βμ)(G)KAα,pμ/(p1)(G)p1

    where

    Dp={Cp((2δα)p(βμpp1),(2Δα)p(βμpp1))1,if  α(βμpp1)0,Cp((2Δα)p(βμpp1),(2δα)p(βμpp1))1,if  α(βμpp1)<0,

    and Cp is the constant in Proposition 9. The equality in the upper(lower) bound is tight for each α,β,μ,p if G is a biregular graph (with α(βμpp1)0 if and only if G is a regular graph.)

    Proof. Hölder inequality gives

    KAα,β(G)=uvE(G)(duα+dvα)βμ(duα+dvα)μ(uvE(G)(duα+dvα)p(βμ))1/p(uvE(G)(duα+dvα)pμ/(p1))(p1)/p,KAα,β(G)pKAα,p(βμ)(G)KAα,pμ/(p1)(G)p1.

    If G is a biregular graph with m edges, we obtain

    KAα,p(βμ)(G)KAα,pμ/(p1)(G)p1=(Δα+δα)p(βμ)m((Δα+δα)pμ/(p1)m)p1=(Δα+δα)p(βμ)(Δα+δα)pμmp=((Δα+δα)βm)p=KAα,β(G)p.

    Since

    (duα+dvα)p(βμ)(duα+dvα)pμ/(p1)=(duα+dvα)p(βμpp1),

    if αp(βμpp1)0, then

    (2δα)p(βμpp1)(duα+dvα)p(βμ)(duα+dvα)pμ/(p1)(2Δα)p(βμpp1),

    and if αp(βμpp1)<0, then

    (2Δα)p(βμpp1)(duα+dvα)p(βμ)(duα+dvα)pμ/(p1)(2δα)p(βμpp1).

    Proposition 9 gives

    KAα,β(G)=uvE(G)(duα+dvα)βμ(duα+dvα)μDp(uvE(G)(duα+dvα)p(βμ))1/p(uvE(G)(duα+dvα)pμ/(p1))(p1)/p,KAα,β(G)pDppKAα,p(βμ)(G)KAα,pμ/(p1)(G)p1.

    Proposition 9 gives that the equality is tight in this last bound for some α,β,μ,p with α(βμpp1)0 if and only if

    (2δα)p(βμpp1)=(2Δα)p(βμpp1)δ=Δ,

    i.e., G is regular.

    If we take β=0 in Theorem 10 we obtain the following result.

    Corollary 11. Let G be any graph with m edges, α,μR and p>1.Then

    KAα,pμ(G)KAα,pμ/(p1)(G)p1mp.

    The equality in the bound is tight for each α,μ,p if G is a biregular graph.

    If we take α=2, β=0, p=2 and μ=1/4 in Theorem 10 we obtain the following result.

    Corollary 12. Let G be any graph with maximum degree Δ, minimum degree δ and m edges, then

    m2mSO(G)SO(G)(Δ+δ)24Δδm2.

    The equality in the upper bound is tight if and only if G is regular.The equality in the lower bound is tight if G is a biregular graph.

    Note that the following result improves the upper bound in Corollary 5 when α>1.

    Theorem 13. Let G be any graph with minimum degree δ, and α1.Then

    21/α1M1(G)SOα(G)M1(G)(221/α)δ,

    and the equality holds for some α>1 in each bound if and only if G is regular.

    Proof. The lower bound follows from Corollary 5. Let us prove the upper bound.

    First of all, we are going to prove that

    (xα+yα)1/αx+(21/α1)y (2.1)

    for every α1 and xy0. Since (2.1) is direct for α=1, it suffices to consider the case α>1.

    We want to compute the minimum value of the function

    f(x,y)=x+(21/α1)y

    with the restrictions g(x,y)=xα+yα=1, xy0. If (x,y) is a critical point, then there exists λR such that

    1=λαxα1,21/α1=λαyα1,

    and so, (y/x)α1=21/α1 and y=(21/α1)1/(α1)x; this fact and the equality xα+yα=1 imply

    (1+(21/α1)α/(α1))xα=1,x=(1+(21/α1)α/(α1))1/α,y=(21/α1)1/(α1)(1+(21/α1)α/(α1))1/α,f(x,y)=(1+(21/α1)α/(α1))1/α+(21/α1)(21/α1)1/(α1)(1+(21/α1)α/(α1))1/α=(1+(21/α1)α/(α1))1/α+(21/α1)α/(α1)(1+(21/α1)α/(α1))1/α=(1+(21/α1)α/(α1))(α1)/α>1.

    If y=0, then x=1 and f(x,y)=1.

    If y=x, then x=21/α=y and

    f(x,y)=21/α+(21/α1)21/α=1.

    Hence, f(x,y)1 and the bound is tight if and only if y=0 or y=x. By homogeneity, we have f(x,y)1 for every xy0 and the bound is tight if and only if y=0 or y=x. This finishes the proof of (2.1).

    Consequently,

    (duα+dvα)1/αdu+(21/α1)dv=du+dv(221/α)dv

    for each α1 and dudv. Thus,

    (duα+dvα)1/αdu+dv(221/α)δ

    for each α1 and uvE(G), and the equality holds for some α>1 if and only if du=dv=δ. Therefore,

    SOα(G)M1(G)(221/α)δ,

    and the equality holds for some α>1 if and only if du=dv=δ for every uvE(G), i.e., G is regular.

    Corollary 14. Let G be any graph with minimum degree δ.Then

    21/2M1(G)SO(G)M1(G)(22)δ,

    and the equality holds in each bound if and only if G is regular.

    The upper bound in Corollary 14 appears in [14,Theorem 7]. Hence, Theorem 13 generalizes [14,Theorem 7].

    A family of topological indices, named Adriatic indices, was put forward in [24,25]. Twenty of them were selected as significant predictors in Mathematical Chemistry. One of them, the inverse sum indeg index, ISI, was singled out in [25] as a significant predictor of total surface area of octane isomers. This index is defined as

    ISI(G)=uvE(G)dudvdu+dv=uvE(G)11du+1dv.

    In the last years there has been an increasing interest in the mathematical properties of this index. We finish this section with two inequalities relating the Sombor, the first Zagreb and the inverse sum indeg indices.

    Theorem 15. Let G be any graph, then

    2(M1(G)2ISI(G))SO(G)>M1(G)2ISI(G)

    and the upper bound is tight if and only if all the connected components of G are regular graphs.

    Proof. It is well-known that for x,y>0, we have

    x2+y2<(x+y)22(x2+y2),x2+y2<x+y2x2+y2,

    and the equality

    du2+dv2du2+dv2+2dudv=(du+dv)2

    give

    (du+dv)du2+dv2+2dudv>(du+dv)2,du2+dv2+2dudvdu+dv>du+dv,SO(G)+2ISI(G)>M1(G).

    In a similar way, we obtain

    12(du+dv)du2+dv2+2dudv(du+dv)2,du2+dv2+22dudvdu+dv2(du+dv),SO(G)+22ISI(G)2M1(G).

    The equality in this last inequality is tight if and only if 2(du2+dv2)=(du+dv)2 for each edge uv, i.e., du=dv for every uvE(G), and this happens if and only if all the connected components of G are regular graphs.

    We start this section with a technical result.

    Proposition 16. Let G be any graph, u,vV(G) with uvE(G), and α,βR{0} with αβ>0.Then KAα,β(G{uv})>KAα,β(G).If α>0, then redKAα,β(G{uv})>redKAα,β(G).Furthermore, if α<0 and G does not have pendant vertices, then redKAα,β(G{uv})>redKAα,β(G).

    Proof. Let {w1,,wdu} and {w1,,wdv} be the sets of neighbors of u and v in G, respectively. Since αβ>0, the function

    U(x,y)=(xα+yα)β

    is strictly increasing in each variable if x,y>0. Hence,

    KAα,β(G{uv})KAα,β(G)=((du+1)α+(dv+1)α)β++j=1du(((du+1)α+dwjα)β(duα+dwjα)β)+k=1dv(((dv+1)α+dwkα)β(dvα+dwkα)β)>((du+1)α+(dv+1)α)β>0.

    The same argument gives the results for the redKAα,β index.

    Given an integer number n2, let Γ(n) (respectively, Γc(n)) be the set of graphs (respectively, connected graphs) with n vertices.

    We study in this section the extremal graphs for the KAα,β index on Γc(n) and Γ(n).

    Theorem 17. Consider α,βR{0} with αβ>0, and an integer n2.

    (1) The complete graph Kn is the unique graph that maximizes KAα,β on Γc(n) or Γ(n).

    (2) Any graph that minimizes KAα,β on Γc(n) is a path.

    (3) If n is even, then the union of n/2 paths P2 is the unique graph that minimizes KAα,β on Γ(n).If n is odd, then the union of (n3)/2 paths P2 with a path P3 isthe unique graph that minimizes KAα,β on Γ(n).

    (4) Furthermore, if α,β>0, then the three previous statements hold if we replace KAα,β with redKAα,β.

    Proof. Let G be a graph with order n, minimum degree δ and m edges.

    Items (1) and (2) follow directly from Proposition 16.

    (3) Assume that n is even. It is well known that the sum of the degrees of a graph is equal to twice the number of edges of the graph (handshaking lemma). Thus, 2mnδn. Since αβ>0, the function

    U(x,y)=(xα+yα)β

    is strictly increasing in each variable if x,y>0. Hence, for any graph GΓ(n), we have

    KAα,β(G)=uvE(G)(duα+dvα)βuvE(G)(1α+1α)β=2βm2βn2=2β1n,

    and the equality is tight in the inequality if and only if du=1 for all uV(G), i.e., G is the union of n/2 path graphs P2.

    Finally, assume that n is odd. Fix a graph GΓ(n). If du=1 for every uV(G), then handshaking lemma gives 2m=n, a contradiction (recall that n is odd). Therefore, there exists a vertex w with dw2. By handshaking lemma we have 2m(n1)δ+2n+1. Recall that the set of neighbors of the vertex w is denoted by N(w). Since U(x,y) is a strictly increasing function in each variable, we obtain

    KAα,β(G)=uN(w)(duα+dwα)β+uvE(G),u,vw(duα+dvα)βuN(w)(1α+2α)β+uvE(G),u,vw(1α+1α)β2(1+2α)β+2β(m2)2(1+2α)β+2β(n+122)=2(1+2α)β+2βn32,

    and the bound is tight if and only if du=1 for all uV(G){w}, and dw=2. Hence, G is the union of (n3)/2 path graphs P2 and a path graph P3.

    (4) If α,β>0, then the same argument gives the results for the redKAα,β index.

    We deal now with the optimization problem for redKAα,β when α,β<0.

    Given an integer number n3, we denote by Γwp(n) (respectively, Γcwp(n)) the set of graphs (respectively, connected graphs) with n vertices and without pendant vertices.

    Theorem 18. Consider α,β<0, and an integer n3.

    (1) The cycle graph Cn is the unique graph that minimizes redKAα,β on Γcwp(n).

    (2) The union of cycle graphs are the only graphs that minimize redKAα,β on Γwp(n).

    (3) The complete graph Kn is the unique graph that maximizes redKAα,β on Γcwp(n) or Γwp(n).

    Proof. Let G be a graph with order n, minimum degree δ and m edges. Since a graph without pendant vertices satisfies δ2, handshaking lemma gives 2mnδ2n. Since α,β<0, the function

    U(x,y)=(xα+yα)β

    is strictly increasing in each variable if x,y>0. Hence, for any graph GΓwp(n), we have

    KAα,β(G)=uvE(G)(duα+dvα)βuvE(G)(2α+2α)β=2(α+1)βm2(α+1)βn,

    and the inequality is tight if and only if du=2 for all uV(G), i.e., the graph G is the union of cycle graphs. If G is connected, then it is the cycle graph Cn.

    Item (3) follows from Proposition 16.

    In this paper, we contributed to the study of inequalities and optimization problems associated with topological indices. In particular, we obtained new lower and upper optimal bounds of general Sombor indices, and we characterized the graphs where equality occurs.

    Specifically, we have obtained inequalities for these indices relating them with other indices: the first Zagreb index, the forgotten index and the first variable Zagreb index. Finally, we solve some extremal problems for general Sombor indices

    We would like to thank the reviewers by their careful reading of the manuscript and their suggestions which have improved the presentation of this work. The research of José M. Rodríguez and José M. Sigarreta was supported by a grant from Agencia Estatal de Investigación (PID2019-106433GB- ´ I00/AEI/10.13039/501100011033), Spain. The research of Jose M. Rodríguez is supported by the Madrid Government (Comunidad de Madrid-Spain) under the Multiannual Agreement with UC3M in the line of Excellence of University Professors (EPUC3M23), and in the context of the V PRICIT (Regional Programme of Research and Technological Innovation).

    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.



    [1] A. K. Jain, Y. Zhong, S. Lakshmanan, Object matching using deformable templates, IEEE Trans. Pattern. Anal. Mach. Intell., 18 (1996), 267–278. https://doi.org/10.1109/34.485555 doi: 10.1109/34.485555
    [2] D. P. Kingma, M, Welling, Auto-Encoding variational bayes, preprint, arXiv: 1312/6114.
    [3] A. Ahmadi, I. Patras, Unsupervised convolutional neural networks for motion estimation, in IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, IEEE, (2016), 1629–1633. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIP.2016.7532634
    [4] S. Joshi, B. Davis, M. Jomier, G. Gerig, Unbiased diffeomorphic atlas construction for computational anatomy, NeuroImage, 23 (2004), S151–S160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.068
    [5] M. A. Viergevera, J. B. Antoine-Maintzb, S. Kleinc, K. Murphyd, M. Staringe, J. P. W. Pluimfa, A survey of medical image registration-under review, Med. Image Anal., 33 (2016), 140–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030 doi: 10.1016/j.media.2016.06.030
    [6] Y. Fu, N. M. Brown, S. U. Saeed, A. Casamitjana, Y. Hu, DeepReg: a deep learning toolkit for medical image registration, J Open Source Softw., 5 (2020), 2705. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.02705 doi: 10.21105/joss.02705
    [7] D. FAIM, A ConvNet Method for Unsupervised 3D Medical Image Registration, in International Workshop on Machine Learning in Medical Imaging, Springer, (2019), 646–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32692-0_74
    [8] Y. Fu, Y. Lei, T. Wang, W. J. Curran, T. Liu, X. Yang, Deep learning in medical image registration: A review, Phys. Med. Biol., 65 (2019), 20TR01. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ab843e doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab843e
    [9] Y. Fu, S. Liu, H. H. Li, D. Yang, Automatic and hierarchical segmentation of the human skeleton in CT images, Phys. Med. Biol., 62 (2017), 2812–2833. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aa6055 doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/aa6055
    [10] X. Yang, N. Wu, G. Cheng, Z. Zhou, D. S.Yu, J. J. Beitler, et al., Automated segmentation of the parotid gland based on atlas registration and machine learning: a longitudinal MRI study in head-and-neck radiation therapy, Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 90 (2014), 1225–1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.08.350 doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.08.350
    [11] X. Huang, Y. Zhang, J. Wang, A biomechanical modeling guided simultaneous motion estimation and image reconstruction technique (SMEIR-Bio) for 4D-CBCT reconstruction, Phys. Med. Biol., 63 (2018), 045002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aaa730 doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/aaa730
    [12] J. Boda-Heggemann, F. Lohr, F. Wenz, M. Flentje, M. Guckenberger, Cone-Beam CT-Based IGRT, Strahlenther Onkol., 187 (2011), 284–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-011-2236-4
    [13] X. Zhen, X. Gu, H. Yan, L. Zhou, X. Jia, S. B. Jiang, CT to Cone-beam CT deformable registration with simultaneous intensity correction, Phys. Med. Biol., 57 (2012), 6807–6826. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/57/21/6807 doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/57/21/6807
    [14] C. Veiga, J. Mcclelland, S. Moinuddin, A. Lourenço, K. Ricketts, J. Annkah, et al., Toward adaptive radiotherapy for head and neck patients: Feasibility study on using CT-to-CBCT deformable registration for "dose of the day" calculations, Med. Phys., 41 (2014), 031703. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4864240 doi: 10.1118/1.4864240
    [15] C. Veiga, G. Janssens, C. L. Teng, T. Baudier, B. K. Teo, First clinical investigation of cone beam computed tomography and deformable registration for adaptive proton therapy for lung cancer, Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 95 (2016), 549–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.01.055 doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.01.055
    [16] B. Zhou, Z. Augenfeld, J. Chapiro, S. K. Zhou, C. Liu, J. S. Duncan, Anatomy-guided multimodal registration by learning segmentation without ground truth: Application to intraprocedural CBCT/MR liver segmentation and registration, Med Image Anal, 71 (2021), 102041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2021.102041 doi: 10.1016/j.media.2021.102041
    [17] B. Zhou, C. Liu, J. S. Duncan, Anatomy-Constrained contrastive learning for synthetic segmentation without ground-truth, in International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Springer, (2021), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87193-2_5
    [18] X. Liang, Y. Jiang, Y. Xie, T. Niu, Quantitative cone-beam CT imaging in radiotherapy: Parallel computation and comprehensive evaluation on the TrueBeam system, IEEE Access, 7 (2019), 66226–66233. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2902168 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2902168
    [19] K. Srinivasan, M. Mohammadi, J. Shepherd, Investigation of effect of reconstruction filters on cone-beam computed tomography image quality, Australas. Phys. Eng. Sci. Med., 37 (2014), 607–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-014-0291-8 doi: 10.1007/s13246-014-0291-8
    [20] L. Ouyang, T. Solberg, J. Wang, Noise reduction in low‐dose cone beam CT by incorporating prior volumetric image information, Med. Phys., 39 (2012), 2569–2577. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3702592 doi: 10.1118/1.3702592
    [21] W. Kang, M. Patwari, Low Dose Helical CBCT denoising by using domain filtering with deep reinforcement learning, preprint, arXiv: 2104/00889.
    [22] J. Zheng, D. Zhang, K. Huang, Y. Sun, Cone-Beam computed tomography image pretreatment and segmentation, in 2018 11th International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Design (ISCID), IEEE, (2018), 25–28. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCID.2018.00012
    [23] X. Liang, L. Chen, D. Nguyen, Z. Zhou, X. Gu, et al., Generating synthesized computed tomography (CT) from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) using CycleGAN for adaptive radiation therapy, Phys. Med. Biol., 64 (2019), 125002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ab22f9 doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab22f9
    [24] D. C. Hansen, G. Landry, F. Kamp, M. Li, C. Belka, K. Parodi, et al., ScatterNet: A convolutional neural network for cone‐beam CT intensity correction, Med. Phys., 45 (2019), 4916–4926. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.13175 doi: 10.1002/mp.13175
    [25] G. Wu, M. Kim, Q. Wang, Y. Gao, D. Shen, Unsupervised deep feature learning for deformable registration of MR brain images, in International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Springer, (2013), 649–656. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40763-5_80
    [26] M. Simonovsky, B. Gutiérrez-Becker, D. Mateus, N. Navab, N. Komodakis, A deep metric for multimodal registration, in International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Springer, (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46726-9_2
    [27] C. Hao, D. Qi, N. Dong, J. Z. Cheng, P. A. Heng, Automatic fetal ultrasound standard plane detection using knowledge transferred recurrent neural networks, in International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Springer, (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24553-9_62
    [28] S. Miao, Z. J. Wang, L. Rui, A CNN regression approach for Real-Time 2D/3D registration, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging, 35 (2016), 1352–1363. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2016.2521800 doi: 10.1109/TMI.2016.2521800
    [29] X. Yang, R. Kwitt, M. Niethammer, Fast rredictive image registration, in Deep Learning and Data Labeling for Medical Applications, Springer, (2016), 48–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46976-8_6
    [30] D. Detone, T. Malisiewicz, A. Rabinovich, Deep image homography estimation, preprint, arXiv: 1606/03798.
    [31] T. Carvalho, E. Rezende, M. Alves, F. Balieiro, R. B. Sovat, Exposing computer generated images by eye's region classification via transfer learning of VGG19 CNN, in 16th IEEE International Conference On Machine Learning And Applications, IEEE, (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMLA.2017.00-47
    [32] J. Krebs, T. Mansi, H. DelingetteZ. Li, F. Ghesu, S. Miao, et al., Robust non-rigid registration through agent-based action learning, in International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Springer, (2017), 344–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66182-7_40
    [33] J. Zhang, C. Wang, S. Liu, L. Jia, J. Sun, Content-Aware unsupervised deep homography estimation, in European Conference on Computer Vision, Springer, (2020), 653–669. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58452-8_38
    [34] M. Bevilacqua, A. Roumy, C. Guillemot, M. L. A. Morel, Super-resolution using neighbor embedding of back-projection residuals, in 2013 18th International Conference on Digital Signal Processing (DSP), 2013.07, IEEE, (2013), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDSP.2013.6622796
    [35] M. Bevilacqua, A. Roumy, C. Guillemot, M. L. A. Morel, Low-Complexity single-image super-resolution based on nonnegative neighbor embedding, in Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference 2012, (2012), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5244/C.26.135
    [36] R. Timofte, V. De, L. V. Gool, Anchored Neighborhood Regression for Fast Example-Based Super-Resolution, in IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, IEEE, (2014), 1920–1927. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCV.2013.241
    [37] J. Kim, J. K. Lee, K. M. Lee, Accurate image super-resolution using very deep convolutional networks, in 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), IEEE, (2016), 1646–1654. https://doi.org/10.1109/Cvpr.2016.182
    [38] K. Simonyan, A. Zisserman, Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition, preprint, arXiv: 1409/1556.
    [39] C. Dong, C. C. Loy, K. He, X. Tang, Image super-resolution using deep convolutional networks, IEEE Trans. Pattern. Anal. Mach. Intell., 38 (2016), 295–307. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2015.2439281 doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2015.2439281
    [40] J. Chen, Y. Li, Y. Du, E. C. Frey, Generating anthropomorphic phantoms using fully unsupervised deformable image registration with convolutional neural networks, Med. Phys., 47 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.14545
    [41] R. Sandkühler, C. Jud, S. Andermatt, P. C. Cattin, AirLab: Autograd image registration laboratory, preprint, arXiv: 1806/09907.
    [42] O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, T. Brox, U-Net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation, in International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Springer, (2015), 234–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28
    [43] D. Rueckert, L. I. Sonoda, C. Hayes, D. Hill, M. O. Leach, Nonrigid registration using free-form deformations: application to breast MR images, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging, 18 (2012), 712–721. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.796284 doi: 10.1109/42.796284
    [44] T. Fechter, D. Baltas, One shot learning for deformable medical image registration and periodic motion tracking, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging, 39 (2019), 12. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2020.2972616 doi: 10.1109/TMI.2020.2972616
    [45] A. V. Dalca, M. Rakic, J. Guttag, M. R. Sabuncu, Learning conditional deformable templates with convolutional networks, in NIPS'19: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Curran Associates Inc., (2019), 806–818.
    [46] P. Viola, W. Iii, Alignment by maximization of mutual information, Int. J. Comput. Vision, 24 (2008), 137v154. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007958904918 doi: 10.1023/A:1007958904918
    [47] Z. S. Saad, D. R. Glen, G. Chen, M. S. Beauchamp, R. Desai, R. W. Cox, A new method for improving functional-to-structural MRI alignment using local Pearson correlation, Neuroimage, 44 (2009), 839–848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.09.037 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.09.037
    [48] Z. Shen, X. Han, Z. Xu, M. Niethammer, Networks for joint affine and Non-parametric image registration, in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, IEEE, (2019), 4224–4233. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2019.00435
    [49] M. Staring, S. Klein, J. Pluim, A rigidity penalty term for nonrigid registration, Med. Phys., 34 (2007), 4098–4108. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2776236 doi: 10.1118/1.2776236
    [50] L. Hui, P. Du, W. Zhao, L. Zhang, H. Sun, Image registration based on corner detection and affine transformation, in International Congress on Image & Signal Processing, IEEE, (2010), 2184–2188. https://doi.org/10.1109/CISP.2010.5647722
    [51] C. Papazov, D. Burschka, Deformable 3D shape registration based on local similarity transforms, in Computer Graphics Forum, Wiley Online Library, (2011), 1493–1502. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2011.02023.x
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Edil D. Molina, Paul Bosch, José M. Sigarreta, Eva Tourís, On the variable inverse sum deg index, 2023, 20, 1551-0018, 8800, 10.3934/mbe.2023387
    2. Peichao Wei, Muhuo Liu, Note on Sombor index of connected graphs with given degree sequence, 2023, 330, 0166218X, 51, 10.1016/j.dam.2023.01.002
    3. Fangxia Wang, Baoyindureng Wu, The k-Sombor Index of Trees, 2024, 41, 0217-5959, 10.1142/S0217595923500021
    4. Peichao Wei, Muhuo Liu, Ivan Gutman, On (exponential) bond incident degree indices of graphs, 2023, 336, 0166218X, 141, 10.1016/j.dam.2023.04.011
    5. Zenan Du, Lihua You, Hechao Liu, Yufei Huang, The Sombor index and coindex of two-trees, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 18982, 10.3934/math.2023967
    6. Tomáš Vetrík, Degree-based function index of trees and unicyclic graphs, 2024, 1598-5865, 10.1007/s12190-024-02307-w
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(3491) PDF downloads(228) Cited by(1)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog