Testing if both Segmentation Utilities and Multilabel Segmentation Utilities have the same functionality:

• For 3d data, a surface (or surfaces, depending on the case) was created by doing a 3d-interpolation of the masks in different 2d views. Data Used: MITK-Data/brain.nrrd.

• For 3d+t data, surfaces wese created by doing a 3d-interpolation for the masks in different 2d views for all the 3 time steps (the dynamic segmentation option). Data Used: MITK-Data/3D+t-Heart/001.

• Boolean Operations:
  • For 3D:
    • The three boolean operations: intersection, difference and union were carried out with these two surfaces.
  • For 3D+t:
    • The three operations intersection, difference and union were performed for all 3 time steps.
  • Result: The results seem to be identical for both Segmentation Utilities and Multilabel Segmentation Utilities for 3D and 3D+t results.
  • The same was done with static segmentation (as the segmentation is constant across time-steps, the operations were done only once). The results work identically for both Segmentation Utilities and Multilabel Segmentation Utilities.
  • Note: One thing to be noted is that for the dynamic segmentation the operations have to be done separately at each time step.

• Contour To Image:
  • For 3D:
    • Data Used: MITK-Data/ContourModel-Data/RefImage.nrrd and MITK-Data/ContourModel-Data/Contours.cnt_set
    • The result is identical for both Segmentation Utilities and Multilabel Segmentation Utilities.
  • For 3D+t: Haven't tried this out. Not sure what data would be good to test this.

• Image Masking :
  • For 3D:
    • For Segmentation Utilities the image masking operation with the Zero minimum option enabled.
    • For Multilabel Segmentation Utilities the image masking operation with the Image Masking mode enabled.
  • For 3D+t:
    • Settings for Segmentation Utilities: Background Value: 0
    • Settings for Multilabel Segmentation Utilities: Masking Mode: Image Masking.
    • Make Output Binary, Overwrite Background, Overwrite Foreground give identical results.
  • Result: For both 3D and 3D+t Segmentation Utilities and MultiLabel Segmentation Utilities seem to give the same result in both 3D and 3D+t cases.
  • Note: The other 3 switches in make_output_binary, overwrite_foreground and overwrite_background seem to do nothing.
  • Note: Also if I switch the masking mode to Surface masking option in Multilabel Segmentation Utilities its output seems identical to the Image Masking option.

• Morphological Operations:
  • All the morphological operations were carried out for both Segmentation Utilities and Multilabel Segmentation Utilities for 3D and 3D+t data.
  • Result: Both seem to give identical results.

• Suface to Image :
  • Result: Results seem identical for both Segmentation Utilities and Multilabel Segmentation Utilities for 3D and 3D+t data.

In T28176#229224, @s349i wrote:

Testing if both Segmentation Utilities and Multilabel Segmentation Utilities have the same functionality:
...

If this is still valid: Could you open tasks for the mentioned issues? Does it make sense to use T28264: [Segmentation Utilities] Various issues and add subtasks here for open issues?

I will redo the testing and see if the issues are still there. Also, I think it makes sense to add the issues to T28264: [Segmentation Utilities] Various issues.