skip to main content
10.1145/3549737.3549800acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessetnConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Machine Learning evaluation of microscopy image segmentation methods: The case of Gaussian Mixture Models

Authors Info & Claims
Published:09 September 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Multiphase materials are encountered in several areas of science and technology. Their properties are determined by the fraction of the phases (material compounds) constituting the composite material. Therefore, the quantitative characterization of phase fractions is highly demanded and has been the subject of extensive studies. To this end, a widely used technique is the segmentation of top-down back-scattered electron SEM (BSE-SEM) images given that different phases are depicted with pixel collections of different luminosity. Gaussian mixture models (GMM) are one the most popular and easily implemented methods to segment the BSE-SEM images through the deconvolution of their histograms. However, the accuracy and the limitations of their application have not been fully investigated. The aim of this paper is to design a neural-network approach to fill this gap and provide a fast tool for the automatic evaluation of the accuracy of GMM predictions for all material phases based on the inspection of the measured SEM image histogram alone. The proposed tool facilitates the decision-making process of an SEM user concerning the optimum choice of a segmentation method.

References

  1. Su, Z., Decencière, E., Nguyen, TT. Artificial neural network approach for multiphase segmentation of battery electrode nano-CT images. npj Comput Mater 8, 30 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-022-00709-7Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Daya R. Nhuchhen, Song P. Sit, David B. Layzell, 2022, Decarbonization of cement production in a hydrogen economy, Applied Energy 317, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119180.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Koumpouri Dimitra, Karatasios Ioannis, Psycharis Vassilis, Giannakopoulos Ioannis, Katsiotis Marios, Kilikoglou Vassilis ,2021, Effect of clinkering conditions on phase evolution and microstructure of Belite Calcium-Sulpho-Aluminate cement clinker, Cement and Concrete Research 147, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2021.106529Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Gonzaga Carla, Okada Cristina, Cesar Paulo, Miranda Walter, Yoshimura Humberto, 2009, Effect of processing induced particle alignment on the fracture toughness and fracture behavior of multiphase dental ceramics, Dental Materials 25, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.03.013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Christiane Rossler, Dominik Zimmer, Patrick Trimby, Horst-Michael Ludwig, 2022, Chemical crystallographic characterization of cement clinkers by EBSD-EDS analysis in the SEM, Cement and Concrete Research 154, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2022.106721Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Georget Fabien, Wilson William, Scrivener Karen, 2022, Simple automation of SEM-EDS spectral maps analysis with Python and the edxia framework, Journal of Microscopy 286, https://doi.org/10.1111/jmi.13099Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Hu Chuanlin, Ma Hongyan, 2016, Statistical analysis of backscattered electron image of hydrated cement paste, Advances in Cement Research 28, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/jadcr.16.00002Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Chatzigeorgiou Manolis, Vrigkas Michalis, Boukos Nikos, Katsiotis Marios, Vassilios Constantoudis, [in writing] Gaussian Mixture model Segmentation on SEM Backscattered electron images of multiphase materials: Prospects and limitations, Journal of MicroscopyGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Chollet, F., & others. (2015). Keras. GitHub. Retrieved from https://github.com/fchollet/kerasGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Günter Klambauer, Thomas Unterthiner, Andreas Mayr, Sepp Hochreiter,2017, Self-Normalizing Neural Networks, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.02515Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Diederik P. Kingma, Jimmy Ba , 2014 , https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1412.6980Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Machine Learning evaluation of microscopy image segmentation methods: The case of Gaussian Mixture Models

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      SETN '22: Proceedings of the 12th Hellenic Conference on Artificial Intelligence
      September 2022
      450 pages
      ISBN:9781450395977
      DOI:10.1145/3549737

      Copyright © 2022 ACM

      © 2022 Association for Computing Machinery. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 9 September 2022

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • short-paper
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format