# Registration of Dental Tomographic Volume Data and Scan Surface Data Using Dynamic Segmentation
## 3 Results & Discussion
### Result
#### 3.1.6 MICP Registration Results  
Detailed results of proposed MICP registration are shown in Figures 9 and 10. Surface data with volume rendered volume data is shown. Also, both the axial and sagittal views are shown. The red surface data is the initial condition, the blue surface data is the result of conventional registration, and the green surface data is the result of the proposed MICP registration.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Input Data**} & **Sampling** & \(N_{Point}\) & \(E_{MICP}\) **(mm)** & \(SD_{MICP}\) **(mm)** & \(D_{MICP}\) **(mm)** & **Time \((\mathbf{s})\)** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Set no.1} & \multirow{4}{*}{Maxillary} & No & 180,186 & 0.2882 & 0.6703 & 0.6219 & 1062.8 \\  & & 1 & 47,499 & 0.2860 & 0.6622 & 0.6159 & 274.8 \\  & & 5 & 2157 & 0.2528 & 0.5933 & 0.5881 & 12.4 \\  & & 10 & 552 & 0.2434 & 0.5635 & 0.5299 & 3.5 \\ \cline{2-8}  & \multirow{4}{*}{Mandible} & No & 131,545 & 0.3210 & 0.8730 & 1.1677 & 793.4 \\  & & 1 & 34,781 & 0.3131 & 0.8470 & 1.1760 & 210.4 \\  & & 5 & 1593 & 0.2609 & 0.6881 & 1.1882 & 9.9 \\  & & 10 & 395 & 0.2401 & 0.5460 & 1.2847 & 2.9 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Set no.2} & \multirow{4}{*}{Maxillary} & No & 173,449 & 0.7386 & 1.6003 & 1.2689 & 1142.4 \\  & & 1 & 46,158 & 0.7279 & 1.5659 & 1.2766 & 307.0 \\  & & 5 & 2155 & 0.6971 & 1.4932 & 1.2698 & 14.1 \\  & & 10 & 539 & 0.5489 & 0.9869 & 1.3935 & 4.0 \\ \cline{2-8}  & \multirow{4}{*}{Mandible} & No & 84,735 & 0.2716 & 0.7618 & 1.0742 & 550.4 \\  & & 1 & 22,285 & 0.2636 & 0.7348 & 1.0698 & 146.4 \\  & & 5 & 1021 & 0.1592 & 0.3407 & 1.0895 & 6.9 \\  & & 10 & 227 & 0.1789 & 0.4136 & 1.1974 & 1.7 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Set no.3} & \multirow{4}{*}{Maxillary} & No & 163,714 & 0.3386 & 1.2525 & 0.4448 & 1149.0 \\  & & 1 & 77,997 & 0.3358 & 1.2416 & 0.4464 & 537.8 \\  & & 5 & 3982 & 0.3337 & 1.2247 & 0.4827 & 27.7 \\  & & 10 & 1013 & 0.3210 & 1.1381 & 0.4661 & 7.4 \\ \cline{2-8}  & \multirow{4}{*}{Mandible} & No & 78,657 & 0.4991 & 1.6165 & 0.5390 & 581.9 \\  & & 1 & 40,812 & 0.5004 & 1.6167 & 0.5388 & 303.0 \\  & & 5 & 2097 & 0.4993 & 1.6027 & 0.5468 & 15.9 \\  & & 10 & 543 & 0.5131 & 1.6708 & 0.5920 & 4.3 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Set no.4} & \multirow{4}{*}{Maxillary} & No & 163,714 & 0.2597 & 1.0095 & 0.5843 & 1092.8 \\  & & 1 & 82,483 & 0.2589 & 1.0015 & 0.5862 & 580.0 \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 5 & 4232 & 0.2576 & 0.9843 & 0.5753 & 29.4 \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 10 & 1081 & 0.2462 & 0.9398 & 0.5856 & 7.6 \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-8}  & \multirow{4}{*}{Mandible} & No & 125,617 & 0.1093 & 0.3891 & 0.9128 & 871.6 \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 1 & 65,067 & 0.1088 & 0.3857 & 0.9130 & 444.3 \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 5 & 3384 & 0.1067 & 0.3621 & 0.9166 & 23.4 \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 10 & 892 & 0.1248 & 0.4066 & 0.9329 & 6.4 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: MICP registration results using uniform down sampled data.  
Figure 9: _Cont._Figure 10: _Cont._  
Figure 9: Modified iterative closest point (MICP) registration result. (**a**) Set no.1; (**b**) Set no.2; (**c**) Set no.3; (**d**) Set no. 4.