The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluation of sparse-view reconstruction from flat-panel-detector cone-beam CT
Open accessAbstract
Flat-panel-detector x-ray cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) is used in a rapidly increasing host of imaging applications, including image-guided surgery and radiotherapy. The purpose of the work is to investigate and evaluate image reconstruction from data collected at projection views significantly fewer than what is used in current CBCT imaging. Specifically, we carried out imaging experiments using a bench-top CBCT system that was designed to mimic imaging conditions in image-guided surgery and radiotherapy; we applied an image reconstruction algorithm based on constrained total-variation (TV)-minimization to data acquired with sparsely sampled view-angles and conducted extensive evaluation of algorithm performance. Results of the evaluation studies demonstrate that, depending upon scanning conditions and imaging tasks, algorithms based on constrained TV-minimization can reconstruct images of potential utility from a small fraction of the data used in typical, current CBCT applications. A practical implication of the study is that the optimization of algorithm design and implementation can be exploited for considerably reducing imaging effort and radiation dose in CBCT.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data Via the EM Algorithm
Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1977.tb01600.x · Cited by 50,444
Candes, E. J., Romberg, J., & Tao, T. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Information Theory · doi:10.1109/tit.2005.862083 · Cited by 15,639
An Introduction To Compressive Sampling
Candes, E. J., & Wakin, M. B. (2008) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2007.914731 · Cited by 10,017
Computed Tomography — An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure
Brenner, D. J., & Hall, E. J. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra072149 · Cited by 8,748
Stable signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate measurements
Candès, E. J., Romberg, J. K., & Tao, T. (2006) · Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics · doi:10.1002/cpa.20124 · Cited by 7,036
Feldkamp, L. A., Davis, L. C., & Kress, J. W. (1984) · Journal of the Optical Society of America A · doi:10.1364/josaa.1.000612 · Cited by 6,319
A universal image quality index
Wang, Z., & Bovik, A. C. (2002) · IEEE Signal Processing Letters · doi:10.1109/97.995823 · Cited by 5,757
Maximum Likelihood Reconstruction for Emission Tomography
Shepp, L. A., & Vardi, Y. (1982) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.1982.4307558 · Cited by 4,429
Mutual-information-based registration of medical images: a survey
Pluim, J. P. W., Maintz, J. B. A., & Viergever, M. A. (2003) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2003.815867 · Cited by 2,890
Gordon, R., Bender, R., & Herman, G. T. (1970) · Journal of Theoretical Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-5193(70)90109-8 · Cited by 2,791
Metadata
- Authors
- Bian, J., Siewerdsen, J. H., Han, X., Sidky, E. Y., Prince, J. L., Pelizzari, C. A., & Pan, X.
- Venue
- Physics in Medicine and Biology
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2010-10-20
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 6575-6599
- ISSN
- 0031-9155 (ISSN-L)
- 1361-6560
- OpenAlex
- W2096309518
- Cited by
- 373
- References
- 30
- FWCI
- 23.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of sparse-view reconstruction from flat-panel-detector cone-beam CT. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0031-9155/55/22/001
- The paper
- Bian, J., Siewerdsen, J. H., Han, X., Sidky, E. Y., Prince, J. L., Pelizzari, C. A., & Pan, X. (2010). Evaluation of sparse-view reconstruction from flat-panel-detector cone-beam CT. Physics in Medicine and Biology. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/55/22/001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
