Literature DB >> 18975719

Singular value description of a digital radiographic detector: theory and measurements.

Iacovos S Kyprianou1, Aldo Badano, Brandon D Gallas, Kyle J Myers.   

Abstract

The H operator represents the deterministic performance of any imaging system. For a linear, digital imaging system, this system operator can be written in terms of a matrix, H, that describes the deterministic response of the system to a set of point objects. A singular value decomposition of this matrix results in a set of orthogonal functions (singular vectors) that form the system basis. A linear combination of these vectors completely describes the transfer of objects through the linear system, where the respective singular values associated with each singular vector describe the magnitude with which that contribution to the object is transferred through the system. This paper is focused on the measurement, analysis, and interpretation of the H matrix for digital x-ray detectors. A key ingredient in the measurement of the H matrix is the detector response to a single x ray (or infinitestimal x-ray beam). The authors have developed a method to estimate the 2D detector shift-variant, asymmetric ray response function (RRF) from multiple measured line response functions (LRFs) using a modified edge technique. The RRF measurements cover a range of x-ray incident angles from 0 degree (equivalent location at the detector center) to 30 degrees (equivalent location at the detector edge) for a standard radiographic or cone-beam CT geometric setup. To demonstrate the method, three beam qualities were tested using the inherent, Lu/Er, and Yb beam filtration. The authors show that measures using the LRF, derived from an edge measurement, underestimate the system's performance when compared with the H matrix derived using the RRF. Furthermore, the authors show that edge measurements must be performed at multiple directions in order to capture rotational asymmetries of the RRF. The authors interpret the results of the H matrix SVD and provide correlations with the familiar MTF methodology. Discussion is made about the benefits of the H matrix technique with regards to signal detection theory, and the characterization of shift-variant imaging systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18975719      PMCID: PMC2736760          DOI: 10.1118/1.2975222

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  18 in total

1.  Measurement of the presampled two-dimensional modulation transfer function of digital imaging systems.

Authors:  Kenneth A Fetterly; Nicholas J Hangiandreou; Beth A Schueler; E Russell Ritenour
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  An energy- and depth-dependent model for x-ray imaging.

Authors:  Brandon D Gallas; Jonathan S Boswell; Aldo Badano; Robert M Gagne; Kyle J Myers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Anisotropic imaging performance in indirect x-ray imaging detectors.

Authors:  Aldo Badano; Iacovos S Kyprianou; Josep Sempau
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  A simple method for determining the modulation transfer function in digital radiography.

Authors:  H Fujita; D Y Tsai; T Itoh; K Doi; J Morishita; K Ueda; A Ohtsuka
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 10.048

Review 5.  Null functions and eigenfunctions: tools for the analysis of imaging systems.

Authors:  H H Barrett; J N Aarsvold; T J Roney
Journal:  Prog Clin Biol Res       Date:  1991

6.  Study of the Generalized MTF and DQE for a New Microangiographic System.

Authors:  Iacovos S Kyprianou; Stephen Rudin; Daniel R Bednarek; Kenneth R Hoffmann
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2004-05-06

7.  A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device.

Authors:  E Samei; M J Flynn; D A Reimann
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Single-step calculation of the MTF from the ERF.

Authors:  N J Schneiders; S C Bushong
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1978 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  New approach to the LSF measurement of x-ray intensifying screens.

Authors:  J M Geary
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1978 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  X-ray imaging performance of structured cesium iodide scintillators.

Authors:  Wei Zhao; Goran Ristic; J A Rowlands
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  5 in total

1.  Accurate MTF measurement in digital radiography using noise response.

Authors:  Andrew Kuhls-Gilcrist; Amit Jain; Daniel R Bednarek; Kenneth R Hoffmann; Stephen Rudin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Measuring the presampled MTF from a reduced number of flat-field images using the Noise Response (NR) method.

Authors:  Andrew Kuhls-Gilcrist; Amit Jain; Daniel R Bednarek; Stephen Rudin
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2011-03-01

3.  Experimental validation of Monte Carlo (MANTIS) simulated x-ray response of columnar CsI scintillator screens.

Authors:  Melanie Freed; Stuart Miller; Katherine Tang; Aldo Badano
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Null-space function estimation for the interior problem.

Authors:  Gengsheng L Zeng; Grant T Gullberg
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Null functions in three-dimensional imaging of alpha and beta particles.

Authors:  Yijun Ding; Luca Caucci; Harrison H Barrett
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.