MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984473139 · doi:10.1118/1.4822484

Spatial frequency spectrum of the x‐ray scatter distribution in CBCT projections

2013· article· en· W1984473139 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory Bootsma, Frank Verhaegen, David A. Jaffray

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodCone beam computed tomographyProjection (relational algebra)Fourier transformOpticsSpatial frequencyPhysicsMathematicsAlgorithmMathematical analysisStatisticsComputed tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: X-ray scatter is a source of significant image quality loss in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). The use of Monte Carlo (MC) simulations separating primary and scattered photons has allowed the structure and nature of the scatter distribution in CBCT to become better elucidated. This work seeks to quantify the structure and determine a suitable basis function for the scatter distribution by examining its spectral components using Fourier analysis. METHODS: The scatter distribution projection data were simulated using a CBCT MC model based on the EGSnrc code. CBCT projection data, with separated primary and scatter signal, were generated for a 30.6 cm diameter water cylinder [single angle projection with varying axis-to-detector distance (ADD) and bowtie filters] and two anthropomorphic phantoms (head and pelvis, 360 projections sampled every 1°, with and without a compensator). The Fourier transform of the resulting scatter distributions was computed and analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. A novel metric called the scatter frequency width (SFW) is introduced to determine the scatter distribution's frequency content. The frequency content results are used to determine a set basis functions, consisting of low-frequency sine and cosine functions, to fit and denoise the scatter distribution generated from MC simulations using a reduced number of photons and projections. The signal recovery is implemented using Fourier filtering (low-pass Butterworth filter) and interpolation. Estimates of the scatter distribution are used to correct and reconstruct simulated projections. RESULTS: The spatial and angular frequencies are contained within a maximum frequency of 0.1 cm(-1) and 7/(2π) rad(-1) for the imaging scenarios examined, with these values varying depending on the object and imaging setup (e.g., ADD and compensator). These data indicate spatial and angular sampling every 5 cm and π/7 rad (~25°) can be used to properly capture the scatter distribution, with reduced sampling possible depending on the imaging scenario. Using a low-pass Butterworth filter, tuned with the SFW values, to denoise the scatter projection data generated from MC simulations using 10(6) photons resulted in an error reduction of greater than 85% for the estimating scatter in single and multiple projections. Analysis showed that the use of a compensator helped reduce the error in estimating the scatter distribution from limited photon simulations by more than 37% when compared to the case without a compensator for the head and pelvis phantoms. Reconstructions of simulated head phantom projections corrected by the filtered and interpolated scatter estimates showed improvements in overall image quality. CONCLUSIONS: The spatial frequency content of the scatter distribution in CBCT is found to be contained within the low frequency domain. The frequency content is modulated both by object and imaging parameters (ADD and compensator). The low-frequency nature of the scatter distribution allows for a limited set of sine and cosine basis functions to be used to accurately represent the scatter signal in the presence of noise and reduced data sampling decreasing MC based scatter estimation time. Compensator induced modulation of the scatter distribution reduces the frequency content and improves the fitting results.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207