Dataset Information

Eliminating incident subtraction in diffraction tomography.

ABSTRACT: Diffraction tomography is a powerful algorithm for producing high-resolution quantitative reconstructions across a wide range of applications. A major drawback of the method is that it operates on the scattered field, which cannot generally be directly measured, but must instead be calculated by subtracting the incident field, i.e. the equivalent field with no scatterer present. Unfortunately, often the incident field is not measurable and hence must be estimated, causing errors. This paper highlights an important, but not widely recognized, result: for particular widely used formulations of the algorithm, the subtraction of the incident field is unnecessary, and the algorithm can actually be applied directly to measured signals. The theory behind this is derived, showing that the incident field will vanish under far-field conditions, and the result is demonstrated in practice. Tests with subsampled arrays show that aliasing artefacts can appear, but can be removed with a filter at the expense of resolution. The incident field also has no effect for a variety of array configurations tested. Finally, the performance in the presence of both correlated and uncorrelated errors is confirmed, in all cases demonstrating that the incident field has a negligible effect on the final reconstruction.

SUBMITTER: Huthwaite P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5134321 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Eliminating incident subtraction in diffraction tomography.

Huthwaite P P

Proceedings. Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences 20161101 2195

Diffraction tomography is a powerful algorithm for producing high-resolution quantitative reconstructions across a wide range of applications. A major drawback of the method is that it operates on the scattered field, which cannot generally be directly measured, but must instead be calculated by subtracting the incident field, i.e. the equivalent field with no scatterer present. Unfortunately, often the incident field is not measurable and hence must be estimated, causing errors. This paper high ...[more]

PMID: 27956890

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To compare assessment of collaterals by single-phase computed tomography (CT) angiography (CTA) and CT perfusion-derived 3-phase CTA, multiphase CTA and temporal maximum-intensity projection (tMIP) images to digital subtraction angiography (DSA), and relate collateral assessments to clinical outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS:Consecutive acute ischemic stroke patients who underwent CT perfusion, CTA, and DSA before thrombectomy with occlusion of the internal carotid artery, the M1 or the M2 segments were included. Two observers assessed all CT images and one separate observer assessed DSA (reference standard) with static and dynamic (modified American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology) collateral grading methods. Interobserver agreement and concordance were quantified with Cohen-weighted ? and concordance correlation coefficient, respectively. Imaging assessments were related to clinical outcome (modified Rankin Scale, ? 2). RESULTS:Interobserver agreement (n = 101) was 0.46 (tMIP), 0.58 (3-phase CTA), 0.67 (multiphase CTA), and 0.69 (single-phase CTA) for static assessments and 0.52 (3-phase CTA) and 0.54 (multiphase CTA) for dynamic assessments. Concordance correlation coefficient (n = 80) was 0.08 (3-phase CTA), 0.09 (single-phase CTA), and 0.23 (multiphase CTA) for static assessments and 0.10 (3-phase CTA) and 0.27 (multiphase CTA) for dynamic assessments. Higher static collateral scores on multiphase CTA (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.7) and tMIP images (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.4) were associated with modified Rankin Scale of 2 or less as were higher modified American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology scores on 3-phase CTA (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.2) and multiphase CTA (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.6). CONCLUSIONS:Concordance between assessments on CT and DSA was poor. Collateral status evaluated on 3-phase CTA and multiphase CTA, but not on DSA, was associated with clinical outcome.

Dataset Information

Eliminating incident subtraction in diffraction tomography.

Publications

Eliminating incident subtraction in diffraction tomography.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets