|
Abstract.
The computed tomography method allows determining the internal structure of objects without physically destroying these objects. The method is used to determine the structure of unknown objects, conduct flaw detection or metrological control of products, etc. Tomographic reconstruction algorithms are used to construct a digital image of an object from a set of X-ray projections collected from different angles. Different applications of tomography (study the structure, flaw detection, testing, etc.) dictate different requirements for the accuracy of reconstruction. As the measuring and computing parts improve, tomographic systems continue to expand their areas of application. Organization of multi-scale measurements in a single device, shooting both the product as a whole and its individual parts from different angles, requires automatic methods for finding the boundaries of the parts of interest, determining their position in the volume in order to accurately position the source-optics-detector trinity relative to the areas of interest. The requirements for the placement of set-up parts additionally increase the requirements for the accuracy of reconstruction. In this paper, the problem of estimating the accuracy of reconstruction depending on the purpose of the tomograph usage under specified restrictions on time or dose load is formulated.
Keywords:
computed tomography, reconstruction algorithms, reconstruction accuracy, structural similarity, flaw detection, metrology.
DOI 10.14357/20718632250201
EDN RMOJJL
PP. 3-11.
References
1. Yamaev A.V., Chukalina M.V., Nikolaev D.P., Kochiev L.G., Chulichkov A.I., Neural network regularization in the problem of few-view computed tomography. // Computer Optics. 2022. V.46. №3. P. 422-428. 2. Fonfría Í., Holgado I. Ortega N., Castrillo A., Plaza S, Improving the Efficiency and Quality of Sustainable Industrial CT by Optimizing Scanning Parameters. // Sensors. 2025. v. 25. № 2440. P.1-27. 3. Kotovitch N.V., Slavin О. А. Skeletal pattern recognition. // JITCS. 2000. V. 4. P. 204-215. 4. International Telecommunication Union. Telecommunication Standardization Sector. Methods for subjective determination of transmission quality. International Telecommunication Union. 1996. 5. Nicholson J., Lazebnik Yu. The R-Factor: A Measure of Scientific Veracity. // The Winnower. 2015. C.1-4. 6. Bagheri A., Alireza S., Concept Evaluating of Image Reconstruction Algorithms SSRB and FORE in the Brain CT. // Frontiers in Biomedical Technologies. 2025. V. 12. P.1. 7. Sun Yi., Huang Yi., Yang Z., Schneider L., Thies M., Gu M., Mei S., Bayer S., Zöllner F., Maier A., EAGLE: an edge-aware gradient localization enhanced loss for CT image reconstruction. // Journal of Medical Imaging. 2025. V. 12. № 1. P. 014001. 8. Yamaev A., Monitored reconstruction improved by postprocessing neural network. // Computer Optics. 2024. V. 48. № 4. P. 601-609. 9. Wolterink J., Leiner T., Viergever M., Išgum I., Generative Adversarial Networks for Noise Reduction in Low-Dose CT. // IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. 2017. V.36, Issue: 12. P. 2536 - 2545. 10. Li Y., Li J., Xue T., Mu J., Wang Q., Zheng L., Wang Y., Lei L., Assessment of the Image Quality of Virtual NonContrast Dual-energy CT Liver Scans Using Both PSNR and SSIM Methods. // CT Theory and Applications. 2025. V. 34. № 1. P. 51-57. 11. Wang Z., Simoncelli E.P., Bovik A.C., Multiscale structural similarity for image quality assessment // The ThirtySeventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems & Computers. 2003. V.2. P. 1398–1402. 12. Sara U., Akter M., Uddin M., Image Quality Assessment through FSIM, SSIM, MSE and PSNR—A Comparative Study. // Journal of Computer and Communications. 2019. V.7. No.3. P.8-18. 13. Chukalina M., Golosio B., Simionovici A., Funke H., X-ray tomography: how to evaluate the reconstruction quality? // Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy. 2004. V.59. №10. P.1755-1758. 14. Wang Z., Simoncelli E., Translation insensitive image similarity in complex wavelet domain. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoustics, Speech, Signal Processing // 2005. P. 573–576. 15. Wu M., Fitzgerald P., Zhang J., Segars W., Yu H., Xu Y., De Man B., XCIST—an open access x-ray CT simulation toolkit. // Physics in Medicine & Biology. 2022. V. 67. № 19. P. 194002. 16. Shutov M., Gilmanov M., Polevoy D., Buzmakov A., Ingacheva A., Chukalina M., Nikolaev D., CT metal artifacts simulation under x-ray total absorption. // Proceedings SPIE. The 16th International Conference on Machine Vision (ICMV 2023), (November 15-18, 2023 Yerevan, Armenia). 2024. V.13072. P. 130720Z. 17. Barret J., Keat N., Artifacts in CT: Recognition and Avoidence. // RadioGraphics. 2004. V.24. P. 1679-1691. 18. Schulze R., Heil U., Grob D., Bruellmann D., Dranischnikow E., Schwanecke U., Schoemer E., Artefacts in CBCT: a review. // Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2011. V.40. P. 256-273. 19. Bechara B., McMahan C., Geha H., Noujeim M., Evaluation of a cone beam CT artefact reduction algorithm. // Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 2012. V.41. P. 422-428. 20. Ingacheva A., Chukalina M., Buzmakov A., Nikolaev D., Method for numeric estimation of Cupping effect on CT images. // Proceedings SPIE. The 12th International Conference on Machine Vision (ICMV 2019), (November 16-18, 2019 Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2020. V.11433. P. 114331-114338. 21. Ingacheva A., Chukalina M., Nikolaev D., Trudy ISA RAN (Proceedings of ISA RAS). // Study of the properties of the polynomial correction function of polychromatic ray integrals in the problem of computed tomography. 2021. V. 71. 1. P. 92-100. 22. Feldkamp L.A., Davis L.C., Kress J. W., Practical conebeam algorithm. // Journal of the Optical Society of America A. 1984. V.1. №6. P. 612-619. 23. Gilbert P., Iterative methods for the three-dimensional reconstruction of an object from projections. // Journal of Theoretical Biology. 1972. V. 36. №1. P. 105-117. 24. Grigoriev М.V., Nazirov I.V., Mogilevskii Е.I., Hafizov А.V., Chukalina М.V. On the problems of working with microtomographic images of porous structures used for modeling flow processes.// Trudy ISA RAN (Proceedings of ISA RAS). 2021. V.71. №1. P. 85-91. 25. Sangregorio E., Stanco F., Tanasi D.: The archeomatica project: towards a new application of the computer graphics in archaeology. // Eurographics Italian Chapter Conference. 2008. V. 8. P. 1-5. 10.2312 / LocalChapterEvents/ItalChap/ItalianChapConf2008/001-005.
|
