skip to main content
10.1145/3635118.3635128acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicaipConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Quantitative Analysis of Artificial Validation Sets for Fourier Domain CT Reconstruction

Published:05 February 2024Publication History

ABSTRACT

In computed tomography and several related scientific domains, the Fourier slice theorem is a powerful mathematical tool to solve the problem of image reconstruction. Although this theorem is well understood in the continuous case, a detailed quantitative analysis of artifacts caused by discretization is rarely found in the computed tomographic literature. Assuming a practical Fourier Domain Reconstruction (FDR) algorithm, which performs resampling by interpolation or approximation in the frequency domain, artifacts have two main sources. One of these is a combination of truncation and aliasing, introduced by Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT), while the other is the numerical error of the function estimation algorithm that performs resampling. Here, we provide an algebraic method to quantitatively isolate distinct sources of error and construct a set of novel metrics that can be used in the numerical analysis of reconstruction methods.

References

  1. Zixuan Chen, Lingxiao Yang, Jianhuang Lai, and Xiaohua Xie. 2023. APRF: Anti-Aliasing Projection Representation Field for Inverse Problem in Imaging. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.05270 (2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Carl R Crawford. 1991. CT filtration aliasing artifacts. IEEE transactions on medical imaging 10, 1 (1991), 99–102.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Carl De Boor and Carl De Boor. 1978. A practical guide to splines. Vol. 27. springer-verlag New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Qiaoqiao Ding, Hui Ji, Hao Gao, and Xiaoqun Zhang. 2021. Learnable multi-scale fourier interpolation for sparse view ct image reconstruction. In Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2021: 24th International Conference, Strasbourg, France, September 27–October 1, 2021, Proceedings, Part VI 24. Springer, 286–295.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Zoltán Domokos and László G Varga. 2022. Fourier Domain CT Reconstruction with Complex Valued Neural Networks. In International Conference on Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence. Springer, 386–397.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Betsy A Dowd, Graham H Campbell, Robert B Marr, Vivek V Nagarkar, Sameer V Tipnis, Lisa Axe, and D Peter Siddons. 1999. Developments in synchrotron x-ray computed microtomography at the National Synchrotron Light Source. In Developments in X-ray Tomography II, Vol. 3772. SPIE, 224–236.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. John I Jackson, Craig H Meyer, Dwight G Nishimura, and Albert Macovski. 1991. Selection of a convolution function for Fourier inversion using gridding (computerised tomography application). IEEE transactions on medical imaging 10, 3 (1991), 473–478.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Filip Jacobs, Erik Sundermann, Bjorn De Sutter, Mark Christiaens, and Ignace Lemahieu. 1998. A fast algorithm to calculate the exact radiological path through a pixel or voxel space. Journal of computing and information technology 6, 1 (1998), 89–94.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Peter M Joseph, Robin D Spital, and Charles D Stockham. 1980. The effects of sampling on CT images. Computerized Tomography 4, 3 (1980), 189–206.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Avinash C Kak and Malcolm Slaney. 2001. Principles of computerized tomographic imaging. SIAM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Thomas Martin Lehmann, Claudia Gonner, and Klaus Spitzer. 1999. Survey: Interpolation methods in medical image processing. IEEE transactions on medical imaging 18, 11 (1999), 1049–1075.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. F Marone and M Stampanoni. 2012. Regridding reconstruction algorithm for real-time tomographic imaging. Journal of synchrotron radiation 19, 6 (2012), 1029–1037.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Noboru Niki. 1988. Considerations of the CT image reconstruction method using the direct 2-D Fourier transform method. Medical Imaging Technology 6, 1 (1988), 9–16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Samuele Papa, Efstratios Gavves, and Jan-Jakob Sonke. 2023. Noise2Aliasing: Unsupervised Deep Learning for View Aliasing and Noise Reduction in 4DCBCT. In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, 481–490.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Milindkumar V Sarode and Prashant R Deshmukh. 2011. Three Dimensional Reconstruction of Coronary Artriesfrom Two View X-Ray Angiographic Images. International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering 3, 6 (2011), 822.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Stefan Schaller, Thomas Flohr, and Peter Steffen. 1998. An efficient Fourier method for 3-D radon inversion in exact cone-beam CT reconstruction. IEEE transactions on medical imaging 17, 2 (1998), 244–250.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Weichao Shen, Yunde Jia, and Yuwei Wu. 2019. 3D shape reconstruction from images in the frequency domain. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 4471–4479.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Robert L Siddon. 1985. Prism representation: a 3D ray-tracing algorithm for radiotherapy applications. Physics in Medicine & Biology 30, 8 (1985), 817.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Henry Stark, John Woods, Indraneel Paul, and Rajesh Hingorani. 1981. Direct Fourier reconstruction in computer tomography. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing 29, 2 (1981), 237–245.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Henry Stark, John W Woods, Indraneel Paul, and Rajesh Hingorani. 1981. An investigation of computerized tomography by direct Fourier inversion and optimum interpolation. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering7 (1981), 496–505.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Charles D Stockham. 1979. A simulation study of aliasing in computed tomography. Radiology 132, 3 (1979), 721–726.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Philippe Thévenaz, Thierry Blu, and Michael Unser. 2000. Interpolation revisited [medical images application]. IEEE Transactions on medical imaging 19, 7 (2000), 739–758.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Yueyue Xiao, Chunxiao Chen, Liang Wang, Jie Yu, Xue Fu, Yuan Zou, Zhe Lin, and Kunpeng Wang. 2023. A novel hybrid generative adversarial network for CT and MRI super-resolution reconstruction. Physics in Medicine and Biology (2023).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Wojciech Zbijewski and Freek J Beekman. 2003. Characterization and suppression of edge and aliasing artefacts in iterative x-ray CT reconstruction. Physics in Medicine & Biology 49, 1 (2003), 145.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Chengzhu Zhang, Yinsheng Li, and Guang-Hong Chen. 2021. Accurate and robust sparse-view angle CT image reconstruction using deep learning and prior image constrained compressed sensing (DL-PICCS). Medical physics 48, 10 (2021), 5765–5781.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Bo Zhu, Jeremiah Z Liu, Stephen F Cauley, Bruce R Rosen, and Matthew S Rosen. 2018. Image reconstruction by domain-transform manifold learning. Nature 555, 7697 (2018), 487–492.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Quantitative Analysis of Artificial Validation Sets for Fourier Domain CT Reconstruction

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ICAIP '23: Proceedings of the 2023 7th International Conference on Advances in Image Processing
      November 2023
      90 pages
      ISBN:9798400708275
      DOI:10.1145/3635118

      Copyright © 2023 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 5 February 2024

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)6
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format