Review on VnV

[JovieL25]

Hello Dr. @smiths,

As discussed in our meeting, you can review my VnV draft and let me know if it is worth continuing the work.

Best, Jingyi

[smiths]

@JovieL25 that is a good start to the VnV plan. We might eventually go through the whole thing to make it a complete document. For now though, I think we should just focus on finishing those sections that will be obviously relevant for your MEng report. Specifically, I suggest you do the following:

• change the title to AortaGeomRecon: System Verification and Validation Plan. (I think there is a command for \progname (or something similar) that you can define that will automatically correct the beginning of the title. It will replace Project Title with the actual title. \progname might be defined in another file.
• in Section 4.5 add a discussion on how you handled testing with large files
• in Section 5.2 add a description of how you would test with a comparison to ITK_Snap. We won't actually do this test, but I think a description of it would add to your report. You essentially want to describe an experiment where you would have different participants do a standard task with both ITK_Snap and with AortaGeomRecon. You can then compare learnability, usability and accuracy.

If we have time, I'd like to add some tests with some manufactured images that have a known solution. We talked about this previously. The idea is that we would build a Dicomm image that had an aorta shaped object in it. We could then compare the segmentation to the known solution. I don't think we'll have time for this though.