2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2019.04.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Image reconstruction: Part 1 – understanding filtered back projection, noise and image acquisition

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
38
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Specimen CB5 was imaged once again at 4× post-mechanics under the same conditions to explore residual strain via DVC. All datasets were reconstructed using standard filtered back projection [41].…”
Section: Xct Image Post-processing and Synthetic Deformationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specimen CB5 was imaged once again at 4× post-mechanics under the same conditions to explore residual strain via DVC. All datasets were reconstructed using standard filtered back projection [41].…”
Section: Xct Image Post-processing and Synthetic Deformationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The image reconstruction techniques are known to affect image quality. Filtered back projection (FBP) has been the standard reconstruction algorithm since the invention of CT 50 years ago but has been known to produce images with greater noise than more recent techniques [27]. Iterative reconstruction (IR) is a newer and more computationally intense method which can typically produce images of better quality at lower radiation dose than FBP [28,29].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, these mentioned methods require an accurate background velocity to perform accurate imaging. In recent years, to enhance the GPR detection capability, scholars have proposed imaging methods, such as diffraction tomography (DT) [53,54], range migration (RM) [43,55], and back projection (BP) [56,57].…”
Section: Gpr Profile Reconstructionmentioning
confidence: 99%