A storm tracking algorithm designed to detect and track fine structure in digitized radar data is evaluated. These fine structures are defined by regions containing values within 3 dB of peaks in reflectivity factor. The algorithm describes storm structure and evolution by correlating these peak regions in time and space. The evaluation consists of a comparison of the algorithm output with raw data and with output from an AFGL algorithm which detects and tracks three-dimensional reflectivity weighted centroids defined by a preselected threshold. It is concluded that the algorithm cannot reliably detect and track significant structures within storms when applied to data sets with a temporal resolution of aprox. 6 min and a spatial resolution of 1.0 deg in azimuth and 0.7 deg in elevation. The significance of tracking 3 dB peaks is questioned and the implication of defining a larger peak threshold is discussed. The algorithm does track the large features of storms with results similar to the AFGL algorithm. However, it does not run in real time and is not modular, unlike the AFGL algorithm.

Computers have become an integral part of medical imaging systems and are used for everything from data acquisition and image generation to image display and analysis. As the scope and complexity of imaging technology steadily increase, more advanced techniques are required to solve the emerging challenges. Biomedical Image Analysis demonstr

ICIAR 2005, the International Conference on Image Analysis and Recognition, was the second ICIAR conference, and was held in Toronto, Canada. ICIAR is organized annually, and alternates between Europe and North America. ICIAR 2004 was held in Porto, Portugal. The idea of o?ering these conferences came as a result of discussion between researchers in Portugal and Canada to encourage collaboration and exchange, mainly between these two countries, but also with the open participation of other countries, addressing recent advances in theory, methodology and applications. TheresponsetothecallforpapersforICIAR2005wasencouraging.From295 full papers submitted, 153 were ?nally accepted (80 oral presentations, and 73 posters). The review process was carried out by the Program Committee m- bersandotherreviewers;allareexpertsinvariousimageanalysisandrecognition areas. Each paper was reviewed by at least two reviewers, and also checked by the conference co-chairs. The high quality of the papers in these proceedings is attributed ?rst to the authors,and second to the quality of the reviews provided by the experts. We would like to thank the authors for responding to our call, andwewholeheartedlythankthe reviewersfor theirexcellentwork,andfortheir timely response. It is this collective e?ort that resulted in the strong conference program and high-quality proceedings in your hands.