You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In trying to sort out #2789, there's a number of places where there is a desire to compare two masks, but to allow some amount of tolerance in the comparison of those masks. This is done my running both through a smoothing filter.
A better solution would be to have a command testing_diff_mask, which has a command-line option permitting a tolerance of distance mismatch between the two images.
I'm intuiting that in the context of binary images, the should be a set of basic image processing steps to do the trick:
Any voxels present in image A that is absent from image B even after N dilations
Any voxels absent from image A that are present in ~(~B dilated N times)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In trying to sort out #2789, there's a number of places where there is a desire to compare two masks, but to allow some amount of tolerance in the comparison of those masks. This is done my running both through a smoothing filter.
A better solution would be to have a command
testing_diff_mask
, which has a command-line option permitting a tolerance of distance mismatch between the two images.I'm intuiting that in the context of binary images, the should be a set of basic image processing steps to do the trick:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: