Iterative image reconstruction algorithm analysis for optical CT radiochromic gel dosimetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background. Modern radiation therapy technologies aim to enhance radiation dose precision to the tumor and utilize hypofractionated treatment regimens. Verifying the dose distributions associated with these advanced radiation therapy treatments remains an active research area due to the complexity of delivery systems and the lack of suitable three-dimensional dosimetry tools. Gel dosimeters are a potential tool for measuring these complex dose distributions. A prototype tabletop solid-tank fan-beam optical CT scanner for readout of gel dosimeters was recently developed. This scanner does not have a straight raypath from source to detector, thus images cannot be reconstructed using filtered backprojection (FBP) and iterative techniques are required. Purpose. To compare a subset of the top performing algorithms in terms of image quality and quantitatively determine the optimal algorithm while accounting for refraction within the optical CT system. The following algorithms were compared: Landweber, superiorized Landweber with the fast gradient projection perturbation routine (S-LAND-FGP), the fast iterative shrinkage/thresholding algorithm with total variation penalty term (FISTA-TV), a monotone version of FISTA-TV (MFISTA-TV), superiorized conjugate gradient with the nonascending perturbation routine (S-CG-NA), superiorized conjugate gradient with the fast gradient projection perturbation routine (S-CG-FGP), superiorized conjugate gradient with with two iterations of CG performed on the current iterate and the nonascending perturbation routine (S-CG-2-NA). Methods. A ray tracing simulator was developed to track the path of light rays as they traverse the different mediums of the optical CT scanner. Two clinical phantoms and several synthetic phantoms were produced and used to evaluate the reconstruction techniques under known conditions. Reconstructed images were analyzed in terms of spatial resolution, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), signal non-uniformity (SNU), mean relative difference (MRD) and reconstruction time. We developed an image quality based method to find the optimal stopping iteration window for each algorithm. Imaging data from the prototype optical CT scanner was reconstructed and analysed to determine the optimal algorithm for this application. Results. The optimal algorithms found through the quantitative scoring metric were FISTA-TV and S-CG-2-NA. MFISTA-TV was found to behave almost identically to FISTA-TV however MFISTA-TV was unable to resolve some of the synthetic phantoms. S-CG-NA showed extreme fluctuations in the SNR and CNR values. S-CG-FGP had large fluctuations in the SNR and CNR values and the algorithm has less noise reduction than FISTA-TV and worse spatial resolution than S-CG-2-NA. S-LAND-FGP had many of the same characteristics as FISTA-TV; high noise reduction and stability from over iterating. However, S-LAND-FGP has worse SNR, CNR and SNU values as well as longer reconstruction time. S-CG-2-NA has superior spatial resolution to all algorithms while still maintaining good noise reduction and is uniquely stable from over iterating. Conclusions. Both optimal algorithms (FISTA-TV and S-CG-2-NA) are stable from over iterating and have excellent edge detection with ESF MTF 50% values of 1.266 mm−1 and 0.992 mm−1. FISTA-TV had the greatest noise reduction with SNR, CNR and SNU values of 424, 434 and 0.91 × 10−4, respectively. However, low spatial resolution makes FISTA-TV only viable for large field dosimetry. S-CG-2-NA has better spatial resolution than FISTA-TV with PSF and LSF MTF 50% values of 1.581 mm−1 and 0.738 mm−1, but less noise reduction. S-CG-2-NA still maintains good SNR, CNR, and SNU values of 168, 158 and 1.13 × 10−4, respectively. Thus, S-CG-2-NA is a well rounded reconstruction algorithm that would be the preferable choice for small field dosimetry.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".