| Literature DB >> 29889095 |
Yuewen Sun1,2, Ximing Liu1,2, Peng Cong1,2, Litao Li1,2, Zhongwei Zhao1,2.
Abstract
Statistical noise may degrade the x-ray image quality of digital radiography (DR) system. This corruption can be alleviated by extending exposure time of detectors and increasing the intensity of radiation. However, in some instances, such as the security check and medical imaging examination, the system demands rapid and low-dose detection. In this study, we propose and test a generative adversarial network (GAN) based x-ray image denoising method. Images used in this study were acquired from a digital radiography (DR) imaging system. Promising results have been obtained in our experiments with x-ray images for the security check application. The Experiment results demonstrated that the proposed new image denoising method was able to effectively remove the statistical noise from x-ray images, while kept sharp edge and clear structure. Thus, comparing with the traditional convolutional neural network (CNN) based method, the proposed new method generates more plausible-looking images, which contains more details.Entities:
Keywords: Digital radiography; generative adversarial network; image denoising
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29889095 PMCID: PMC6130336 DOI: 10.3233/XST-17356
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Xray Sci Technol ISSN: 0895-3996 Impact factor: 1.535
Fig. 1The structure of the generator network.
Fig. 2The structure of the discriminator network.
Fig. 3Training pairs in the dataset.
Fig. 4Convergence curves during the training process of four networks.
Fig. 5Denoising results of image 1.
Fig. 6Denoising results of image 2.
Average quantitative results of different results
| Method | Noisy | BM3D | MSE | ADV | WORES | WOMSE | WOTV | DNGAN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PSNR | 24.15 | 33.18 | 35.04 | 25.83 | 31.73 | 30.86 | 32.76 | 32.95 |
| SSIM | 0.387 | 0.904 | 0.913 | 0.760 | 0.887 | 0.892 | 0.890 | 0.894 |
| PDR | 0.344 | 0.119 | 0.105 | 0.143 | 0.067 | 0.045 | 0.051 | 0.043 |
Fig. 7Denoising results of different weights.
Average PDR results of different weights
| Weight | 0.2 | 0.5 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSE | 0.070 | 0.065 | 0.061 | 0.076 | 0.090 |
| ADV | 0.116 | 0.087 | 0.061 | 0.066 | 0.078 |
| Content | 0.097 | 0.069 | 0.061 | 0.057 | 0.054 |
| TV | 0.073 | 0.059 | 0.061 | 0.063 | 0.064 |