Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Ray-driven Spectral CT Reconstruction Based on Neural Base-Material Fields

Published 10 Apr 2024 in eess.IV and cs.CV | (2404.06991v1)

Abstract: In spectral CT reconstruction, the basis materials decomposition involves solving a large-scale nonlinear system of integral equations, which is highly ill-posed mathematically. This paper proposes a model that parameterizes the attenuation coefficients of the object using a neural field representation, thereby avoiding the complex calculations of pixel-driven projection coefficient matrices during the discretization process of line integrals. It introduces a lightweight discretization method for line integrals based on a ray-driven neural field, enhancing the accuracy of the integral approximation during the discretization process. The basis materials are represented as continuous vector-valued implicit functions to establish a neural field parameterization model for the basis materials. The auto-differentiation framework of deep learning is then used to solve the implicit continuous function of the neural base-material fields. This method is not limited by the spatial resolution of reconstructed images, and the network has compact and regular properties. Experimental validation shows that our method performs exceptionally well in addressing the spectral CT reconstruction. Additionally, it fulfils the requirements for the generation of high-resolution reconstruction images.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (38)
  1. W. Perman and J. Vetter, “Evaluation of a prototype dual‐energy computed tomographic apparatus. i. phantom studies,” Medical physics, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 334–339, 1986.
  2. T. Niu, X. Dong, M. Petrongolo, and L. Zhu, “Iterative image‐domain decomposition for dual‐energy ct,” Medical physics, vol. 41, no. 4, p. 041901, 2014.
  3. B. Mildenhall, P. P. Srinivasan, M. Tancik, J. T. Barron, R. Ramamoorthi, and R. Ng, “Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 99–106, 2021.
  4. R. A. BROOKS and G. D. CHIRO, “Beam hardening in x-ray reconstructive tomography,” Physics in medicine & biology, vol. 21, no. 3, p. 390, 1976.
  5. Y. Xue, R. Ruan, X. Hu, Y. Kuang, J. Wang, Y. Long, and T. Niu, “Statistical image‐domain multimaterial decomposition for dual‐energy ct,” Medical physics, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 886–901, 2017.
  6. D. Wu, L. Zhang, X. Zhu, X. Xu, and S. Wang, “A weighted polynomial based material decomposition method for spectral x-ray ct imaging,” Physics in Medicine & Biology, vol. 61, no. 10, p. 3749, 2016.
  7. C. Maaß, M. Baer, and M. Kachelrieß, “Image‐based dual energy ct using optimized precorrection functions: A practical new approach of material decomposition in image domain,” Medical physics, vol. 36, no. 8, pp. 3818–3829, 2009.
  8. A. Coleman and M. Sinclair, “A beam-hardening correction using dual-energy computed tomography,” Physics in medicine & biology, vol. 30, no. 11, p. 1251, 1985.
  9. Z. Ying, R. Naidu, and C. R. Crawford, “Dual energy computed tomography for explosive detection,” Journal of X-ray Science and Technology, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 235–256, 2006.
  10. E. Y. Sidky, Y. Zou, and X. Pan, “Impact of polychromatic x-ray sources on helical, cone-beam computed tomography and dual-energy methods,” Physics in Medicine & Biology, vol. 49, no. 11, p. 2293, 2004.
  11. P. Stenner, T. Berkus, and M. Kachelriess, “Empirical dual energy calibration (edec) for cone‐beam computed tomography,” Medical physics, vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 3630–3641, 2007.
  12. K.-S. Chuang and H. Huang, “Comparison of four dual energy image decomposition methods,” Physics in Medicine & Biology, vol. 33, no. 4, p. 455, 1988.
  13. Y. Zhao, X. Zhao, and P. Zhang, “An extended algebraic reconstruction technique (e-art) for dual spectral ct,” IEEE transactions on medical imaging, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 761–768, 2014.
  14. J. Hu, X. Zhao, and F. Wang, “An extended simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique (e‐sart) for x‐ray dual spectral computed tomography,” Scanning, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 599–611, 2016.
  15. M. Li, Y. Zhao, and P. Zhang, “Accurate iterative fbp reconstruction method for material decomposition of dual energy ct,” IEEE transactions on medical imaging, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 802–812, 2018.
  16. H. Pan, S. Zhao, W. Zhang, H. Zhang, and X. Zhao, “Fast iterative reconstruction for multi-spectral ct by a schmidt orthogonal modification algorithm (soma),” Inverse Problems, vol. 39, no. 8, p. 085001, 2023.
  17. B. Zhu, J. Z. Liu, S. F. Cauley, B. R. Rosen, and M. S. Rosen, “Image reconstruction by domain-transform manifold learning,” Nature, vol. 555, no. 7697, pp. 487–492, 2018.
  18. J. F. Abascal, N. Ducros, V. Pronina, S. Rit, P.-A. Rodesch, T. Broussaud, S. Bussod, P. C. Douek, A. Hauptmann, and S. Arridge, “Material decomposition in spectral ct using deep learning: a sim2real transfer approach,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 25 632–25 647, 2021.
  19. W. Zhang, H. Zhang, L. Wang, X. Wang, X. Hu, A. Cai, L. Li, T. Niu, and B. Yan, “Image domain dual material decomposition for dual‐energy ct using butterfly network,” Medical physics, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 2037–2051, 2019.
  20. D. P. Clark, M. Holbrook, and C. T. Badea, “Multi-energy ct decomposition using convolutional neural networks,” in Medical Imaging 2018: Physics of Medical Imaging, vol. 10573.   SPIE, 2018, pp. 415–423.
  21. Z. Shi, H. Li, Q. Cao, Z. Wang, and M. Cheng, “A material decomposition method for dual‐energy ct via dual interactive wasserstein generative adversarial networks,” Medical Physics, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 2891–2905, 2021.
  22. H. Gong, S. Tao, K. Rajendran, W. Zhou, C. H. McCollough, and S. Leng, “Deep‐learning‐based direct inversion for material decomposition,” Medical physics, vol. 47, no. 12, pp. 6294–6309, 2020.
  23. W. Cong, Y. Xi, P. Fitzgerald, B. De Man, and G. Wang, “Virtual monoenergetic ct imaging via deep learning,” Patterns, vol. 1, no. 8, 2020.
  24. A. Mittal, “Neural radiance fields: Past, present, and future,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.10050, 2023.
  25. A. Chen, Z. Xu, A. Geiger, J. Yu, and H. Su, “Tensorf: Tensorial radiance fields,” in European Conference on Computer Vision.   Springer, 2022, pp. 333–350.
  26. Y. Xie, T. Takikawa, S. Saito, O. Litany, S. Yan, N. Khan, F. Tombari, J. Tompkin, V. Sitzmann, and S. Sridhar, “Neural fields in visual computing and beyond,” in Computer Graphics Forum, vol. 41, no. 2.   Wiley Online Library, 2022, pp. 641–676.
  27. Y. Sun, J. Liu, M. Xie, B. Wohlberg, and U. S. Kamilov, “Coil: Coordinate-based internal learning for tomographic imaging,” IEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging, vol. 7, pp. 1400–1412, 2021.
  28. G. Zang, R. Idoughi, R. Li, P. Wonka, and W. Heidrich, “Intratomo: self-supervised learning-based tomography via sinogram synthesis and prediction,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 1960–1970.
  29. D. Rückert, Y. Wang, R. Li, R. Idoughi, and W. Heidrich, “Neat: Neural adaptive tomography,” ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 1–13, 2022.
  30. L. Shen, J. Pauly, and L. Xing, “Nerp: implicit neural representation learning with prior embedding for sparsely sampled image reconstruction,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2022.
  31. A. W. Reed, H. Kim, R. Anirudh, K. A. Mohan, K. Champley, J. Kang, and S. Jayasuriya, “Dynamic ct reconstruction from limited views with implicit neural representations and parametric motion fields,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 2258–2268.
  32. R. Zha, Y. Zhang, and H. Li, “Naf: Neural attenuation fields for sparse-view cbct reconstruction,” in International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention.   Springer, 2022, pp. 442–452.
  33. F. Vasconcelos, B. He, N. Singh, and Y. W. Teh, “Uncertainr: Uncertainty quantification of end-to-end implicit neural representations for computed tomography,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.10847, 2022.
  34. K. Hornik, M. Stinchcombe, and H. White, “Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators,” Neural Networks, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 359–366, 1989.
  35. N. Rahaman, A. Baratin, D. Arpit, F. Draxler, M. Lin, F. Hamprecht, Y. Bengio, and A. Courville, “On the spectral bias of neural networks,” in International conference on machine learning.   PMLR, 2019, pp. 5301–5310.
  36. M. Tancik, B. Mildenhall, T. Wang, D. Schmidt, P. P. Srinivasan, J. T. Barron, and R. Ng, “Learned initializations for optimizing coordinate-based neural representations,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 2846–2855.
  37. V. Sitzmann, J. Martel, A. Bergman, D. Lindell, and G. Wetzstein, “Implicit neural representations with periodic activation functions,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 33, pp. 7462–7473, 2020.
  38. Z. Chen, Z. Li, L. Song, L. Chen, J. Yu, J. Yuan, and Y. Xu, “Neurbf: A neural fields representation with adaptive radial basis functions,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2023, pp. 4182–4194.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Sign Up to Summarize

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Sign Up to Generate All Videos Subscribe on YouTube

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Sign Up to Generate

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Generate Now

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Sign Up