Dataset Viewer
Auto-converted to Parquet Duplicate
image_id
string
image
image
mask
image
fov_mask
image
subset
string
case_index
int32
vessel_fraction
float32
fov_fraction
float32
od_center_x_a
int32
od_center_y_a
int32
od_vessel_origin_x_a
int32
od_vessel_origin_y_a
int32
od_diameter_a
int32
od_center_x_b
int32
od_center_y_b
int32
od_vessel_origin_x_b
int32
od_vessel_origin_y_b
int32
od_diameter_b
int32
01_h
healthy
1
0.101876
0.844654
2,648
1,155
2,694
1,178
402
2,630
1,137
2,681
1,170
382
02_h
healthy
2
0.098767
0.844726
988
1,085
907
1,086
416
990
1,075
917
1,087
392
03_h
healthy
3
0.105575
0.844445
2,703
1,153
2,726
1,180
424
2,698
1,150
2,698
1,172
415
04_h
healthy
4
0.094266
0.84456
966
1,122
939
1,125
414
968
1,117
948
1,125
414
05_h
healthy
5
0.090257
0.844449
2,684
1,074
2,764
1,119
426
2,676
1,074
2,765
1,108
433
06_h
healthy
6
0.101385
0.844385
933
1,116
871
1,138
373
927
1,115
889
1,133
376
07_h
healthy
7
0.089063
0.844579
2,798
1,159
2,879
1,142
408
2,787
1,156
2,862
1,195
425
08_h
healthy
8
0.100378
0.84452
880
1,055
810
1,057
398
875
1,065
824
1,076
410
09_h
healthy
9
0.077757
0.844673
2,812
1,076
2,868
1,094
400
2,795
1,080
2,861
1,092
415
10_h
healthy
10
0.086183
0.84459
883
1,128
850
1,160
384
880
1,127
866
1,156
381
11_h
healthy
11
0.093458
0.844685
2,909
1,124
2,976
1,146
385
2,918
1,128
2,954
1,141
408
12_h
healthy
12
0.104875
0.844523
997
986
910
984
374
1,001
991
943
992
377
13_h
healthy
13
0.086978
0.844493
2,708
1,098
2,770
1,115
360
2,703
1,093
2,725
1,141
369
14_h
healthy
14
0.087236
0.84423
918
1,078
861
1,116
352
911
1,073
930
1,124
379
15_h
healthy
15
0.078341
0.844536
2,701
1,118
2,778
1,133
354
2,703
1,118
2,746
1,145
360
01_g
glaucoma
1
0.066904
0.84473
2,715
1,070
2,773
1,096
365
2,713
1,082
2,766
1,099
362
02_g
glaucoma
2
0.074489
0.844892
873
1,107
828
1,128
372
873
110
827
1,135
367
03_g
glaucoma
3
0.057754
0.844723
2,647
1,176
2,718
1,152
430
2,645
1,170
2,720
1,155
435
04_g
glaucoma
4
0.064373
0.844539
990
1,094
946
1,095
393
1,000
1,091
966
1,084
404
05_g
glaucoma
5
0.065367
0.844638
2,748
1,074
2,812
1,086
374
2,744
1,076
2,799
1,088
378
06_g
glaucoma
6
0.068386
0.844533
941
1,159
887
1,169
391
966
1,156
920
1,197
391
07_g
glaucoma
7
0.06509
0.84459
2,746
1,048
2,775
1,045
385
2,744
1,055
2,730
1,051
389
08_g
glaucoma
8
0.067872
0.844646
934
1,178
942
1,195
384
941
1,185
948
1,197
395
09_g
glaucoma
9
0.066209
0.844881
930
1,115
918
1,134
358
941
1,116
927
1,140
383
10_g
glaucoma
10
0.065556
0.844646
2,633
1,171
2,700
1,193
368
2,624
1,182
2,646
1,204
389
11_g
glaucoma
11
0.076441
0.8446
2,644
1,072
2,667
1,079
408
2,659
1,100
2,643
1,092
414
12_g
glaucoma
12
0.082638
0.84463
1,033
1,065
1,035
1,081
379
1,025
1,067
1,060
1,094
385
13_g
glaucoma
13
0.068046
0.845
2,709
1,141
2,799
1,158
335
2,714
1,140
2,776
1,150
340
14_g
glaucoma
14
0.070635
0.844846
958
1,129
887
1,129
331
959
1,127
897
1,146
373
15_g
glaucoma
15
0.073203
0.844423
2,649
1,145
2,665
1,119
402
2,639
1,143
2,655
1,117
412
01_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
1
0.050857
0.844557
860
1,180
771
1,193
385
845
1,186
780
1,196
389
02_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
2
0.063758
0.844806
2,759
965
2,808
1,168
369
2,763
1,149
2,833
1,167
385
03_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
3
0.060401
0.844904
900
1,050
887
1,055
376
902
1,067
885
1,057
339
04_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
4
0.056464
0.844607
2,768
1,278
2,789
1,283
368
2,762
1,279
2,787
1,287
369
05_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
5
0.062182
0.844482
984
1,160
928
1,173
331
979
1,157
933
1,166
328
06_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
6
0.075497
0.844711
2,638
1,108
2,681
1,080
368
2,652
1,107
2,667
1,080
378
07_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
7
0.077744
0.844795
888
1,078
867
1,077
394
899
1,087
865
1,074
400
08_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
8
0.075229
0.844597
2,695
1,144
2,723
1,157
364
2,690
1,145
2,716
1,153
375
09_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
9
0.067737
0.844613
2,584
1,280
2,593
1,274
335
2,596
1,277
2,601
1,280
345
10_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
10
0.087338
0.844381
990
1,199
949
1,234
341
984
1,197
946
1,228
364
11_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
11
0.084656
0.844409
2,764
1,225
2,806
1,232
360
2,766
1,223
2,795
1,233
352
12_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
12
0.068015
0.844696
901
978
905
956
324
920
998
914
983
392
13_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
13
0.068351
0.844682
2,688
1,269
2,749
1,289
309
2,702
1,266
2,743
1,286
323
14_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
14
0.076348
0.844684
866
1,133
845
1,140
347
868
1,140
858
1,139
363
15_dr
diabetic_retinopathy
15
0.065366
0.844549
2,776
1,121
2,821
1,119
356
2,778
1,119
2,820
1,119
358

HRF — High-Resolution Fundus Image Database

Manual retinal blood-vessel segmentation ground truth for 45 high-resolution color fundus photographs (3504×2336) from the Pattern Recognition Lab (CS5) and Dept. of Ophthalmology, FAU Erlangen-Nürnberg, with Brno University of Technology and the Eye Clinic Zlín — Budai et al., Int. J. Biomedical Imaging 2013.

  • Modality: color fundus photography (2D RGB), 3504×2336
  • Organ: retina / eye
  • Target: binary blood-vessel segmentation
  • Cases: 45 — 15 healthy · 15 glaucomatous · 15 diabetic retinopathy
  • License: CC BY 4.0
  • Source: FAU HRF homepage (official, author-hosted)

Scope — please read. This repository contains only the segmentation component of HRF. The 36-image Image Quality Assessment set hosted on the same FAU page (18 good/bad pairs, different resolutions, no segmentation ground truth, separate citation — Köhler et al., CBMS 2013) is not included: it is a different dataset that shares a download page. A naive "download HRF" yields 45+36 = 81 images; this repo is the 45 segmentation images.

Splits

There is no official train/test split. Neither the FAU page nor the Budai paper defines one, so all 45 cases are published as a single train split.

The split most often seen in the literature is a community convention from Orlando et al. 2017 (IEEE TBME 64(1):16–27) — the first 5 of each diagnosis category for training (15) and the remaining 30 for testing. It is not author-defined. Reconstruct it exactly with case_index <= 5 (train) vs case_index >= 6 (test).

Columns

Column Type Notes
image_id string Case stem, e.g. 01_h, 07_g, 15_dr — the pairing key
image Image (RGB) 3504×2336 fundus photograph. Original JPEG bytes, stored verbatim (no re-encode)
mask Image (L) Ground truth. Manual binary vessel segmentation, {0, 255}, 3504×2336
fov_mask Image (L) Field-of-view / camera-aperture mask, {0, 255}. Auxiliary — not a segmentation target
subset string healthy | glaucoma | diabetic_retinopathy
case_index int32 1–15 within the subset (parsed from the filename prefix)
vessel_fraction float32 Fraction of pixels labelled vessel (0.051–0.106, mean 0.077)
fov_fraction float32 Fraction of pixels inside the FOV (~0.845)
od_center_x_a, od_center_y_a int32 Optic-disc ("papilla") centre, Expert A
od_vessel_origin_x_a, od_vessel_origin_y_a int32 Central-vessel origin, Expert A
od_diameter_a int32 Optic-disc diameter in px, Expert A
od_center_x_b, od_center_y_b int32 Optic-disc centre, Expert B
od_vessel_origin_x_b, od_vessel_origin_y_b int32 Central-vessel origin, Expert B
od_diameter_b int32 Optic-disc diameter in px, Expert B

For binary vessel segmentation use mask > 0 (masks are already clean two-valued).

The optic-disc columns are coordinates, not masks. FAU ships an optic_disk_centers.xls "Optic Disk Goldstandard" that contains localisation annotations only — there is no optic-disc segmentation in HRF. They are carried here as metadata for localisation/registration use.

Ground truth

mask is the manual vessel segmentation from manual1/. It is the only tier the Budai paper evaluates against (Tables 4–5, per-subset Se/Sp/Acc), and the FAU page describes it as produced by "a group of experts working in the field of retinal image analysis and clinicians from the cooperated ophthalmology clinics" — a single expert-consensus set, so there is no rater to choose.

HRF has no second-observer segmentation. (The Budai paper's remark about "a second manual segmentation made by a human observer" refers to DRIVE and STARE, the external databases it compares against — not to HRF.)

Mask normalisation applied here

42 of the 45 source vessel masks are strictly {0, 255}. Three — 11_h, 12_h, 13_h — carry anti-aliased grey edges (175/215/203 distinct values); they are exactly the three files stored uncompressed rather than PackBits upstream, i.e. a different export path. Affected pixels: 599 / 1584 / 1119 out of 8,185,344 (0.007–0.019%). All masks were binarised at ≥128 so every case ships clean {0, 255}. The ≥128 threshold (rather than >0) keeps those three geometrically consistent with the other 42 instead of gaining a ~1 px anti-alias fringe.

FOV masks are stored 3-channel RGB (R==G==B) at the source; they are reduced to single-channel here.

Provenance, naming and cross-dataset overlap

  • Provenance: official, author-hosted FAU archives (all.zip, 76,317,613 B, byte-size verified). Counts match the paper exactly: 15/15/15 = 45. ⚠️ Third-party re-hosts vary in fidelity — one HF mirror carries 90 downscaled rows with no vessel GT. This repo is built from the FAU originals.
  • Faithful naming: yes, with the IQA-set exclusion noted in the scope box above.
  • Ground-truth tier: single expert-consensus vessel set; no second observer.
  • Cross-dataset overlap: NONE. HRF shares no images, archives or lineage with DRIVE, STARE, CHASE_DB1, IDRiD, PAPILA, RAVIR, RITE or Messidor — different acquisition sites, cameras and resolutions. No cross-reference ID exists or is needed. (Note that third-party re-annotations of these same 45 images do exist — e.g. HRF-AV artery/vein labels, HRF-Seg+ — and overlap HRF 100%; do not benchmark those alongside this repo.)

Citation

@article{budai2013robust,
  title   = {Robust Vessel Segmentation in Fundus Images},
  author  = {Budai, Attila and Bock, R{\"u}diger and Maier, Andreas and
             Hornegger, Joachim and Michelson, Georg},
  journal = {International Journal of Biomedical Imaging},
  volume  = {2013},
  pages   = {154860},
  year    = {2013},
  doi     = {10.1155/2013/154860}
}

Companion database paper: Odstrcilik, J. et al. "Retinal vessel segmentation by improved matched filtering: evaluation on a new high-resolution fundus image database." IET Image Processing 7(4):373–383, 2013. doi:10.1049/iet-ipr.2012.0455

Downloads last month
40