Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 363

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Statistical inversion and Monte Carlo sampling methods in electrical impedance tomography

Kaipio, Jari P, Kolehmainen, Ville, Somersalo, Erkki, Vauhkonen, Marko·2000·Inverse Problems

Abstract

This paper discusses the electrical impedance tomography (EIT) problem: electric currents are injected into a body with unknown electromagnetic properties through a set of contact electrodes. The corresponding voltages that are needed to maintain these currents are measured. The objective is to estimate the unknown resistivity, or more generally the impedivity distribution of the body based on this information. The most commonly used method to tackle this problem in practice is to use gradient-based local linearizations. We give a proof for the differentiability of the electrode boundary data with respect to the resistivity distribution and the contact impedances. Due to the ill-posedness of the problem, regularization has to be employed. In this paper, we consider the EIT problem in the framework of Bayesian statistics, where the inverse problem is recast into a form of statistical inference. The problem is to estimate the posterior distribution of the unknown parameters conditioned on measurement data. From the posterior density, various estimates for the resistivity distribution can be calculated as well as a posteriori uncertainties. The search of the maximum a posteriori estimate is typically an optimization problem, while the conditional expectation is computed by integrating the variable with respect to the posterior probability distribution. In practice, especially when the dimension of the parameter space is large, this integration must be done by Monte Carlo methods such as the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) integration. These methods can also be used for calculation of a posteriori uncertainties for the estimators. In this paper, we concentrate on MCMC integration methods. In particular, we demonstrate by numerical examples the statistical approach when the prior densities are non-differentiable, such as the prior penalizing the total variation or the L 1 norm of the resistivity.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0266-5611/16/5/321

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 31 references

Metadata

Authors
Kaipio, J. P., Kolehmainen, V., Somersalo, E., & Vauhkonen, M.
Venue
Inverse Problems
Published
2000-10-01
Volume
16
Issue
5
Pages
1487-1522
ISSN
  • 0266-5611 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6420
OpenAlex
W2170164530
Cited by
363
References
31
FWCI
13.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Statistical inversion and Monte Carlo sampling methods in electrical impedance tomography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0266-5611/16/5/321
The paper
Kaipio, J. P., Kolehmainen, V., Somersalo, E., & Vauhkonen, M. (2000). Statistical inversion and Monte Carlo sampling methods in electrical impedance tomography. Inverse Problems. https://doi.org/10.1088/0266-5611/16/5/321

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.