16 research outputs found

    Spectral2Spectral: Image-spectral Similarity Assisted Spectral CT Deep Reconstruction without Reference

    Full text link
    The photon-counting detector (PCD) based spectral computed tomography attracts much more attentions since it has the capability to provide more accurate identification and quantitative analysis for biomedical materials. The limited number of photons within narrow energy-bin leads to low signal-noise ratio data. The existing supervised deep reconstruction networks for CT reconstruction are difficult to address these challenges. In this paper, we propose an iterative deep reconstruction network to synergize model and data priors into a unified framework, named as Spectral2Spectral. Our Spectral2Spectral employs an unsupervised deep training strategy to obtain high-quality images from noisy data with an end-to-end fashion. The structural similarity prior within image-spectral domain is refined as a regularization term to further constrain the network training. The weights of neural network are automatically updated to capture image features and structures with iterative process. Three large-scale preclinical datasets experiments demonstrate that the Spectral2spectral reconstruct better image quality than other state-of-the-art methods

    A comparative study between paired and unpaired Image Quality Assessment in Low-Dose CT Denoising

    Full text link
    The current deep learning approaches for low-dose CT denoising can be divided into paired and unpaired methods. The former involves the use of well-paired datasets, whilst the latter relaxes this constraint. The large availability of unpaired datasets has raised the interest in deepening unpaired denoising strategies that, in turn, need for robust evaluation techniques going beyond the qualitative evaluation. To this end, we can use quantitative image quality assessment scores that we divided into two categories, i.e., paired and unpaired measures. However, the interpretation of unpaired metrics is not straightforward, also because the consistency with paired metrics has not been fully investigated. To cope with this limitation, in this work we consider 15 paired and unpaired scores, which we applied to assess the performance of low-dose CT denoising. We perform an in-depth statistical analysis that not only studies the correlation between paired and unpaired metrics but also within each category. This brings out useful guidelines that can help researchers and practitioners select the right measure for their applications

    Enhancing Image Quality: A Comparative Study of Spatial, Frequency Domain, and Deep Learning Methods

    Get PDF
    Image restoration and noise reduction methods have been created to restore deteriorated images and improve their quality. These methods have garnered substantial significance in recent times, mainly due to the growing utilization of digital imaging across diverse domains, including but not limited to medical imaging, surveillance, satellite imaging, and numerous others. In this paper, we conduct a comparative analysis of three distinct approaches to image restoration: the spatial method, the frequency domain method, and the deep learning method. The study was conducted on a dataset of 10,000 images, and the performance of each method was evaluated using the accuracy and loss metrics. The results show that the deep learning method outperformed the other two methods, achieving a validation accuracy of 72.68% after 10 epochs. The spatial method had the lowest accuracy of the three, achieving a validation accuracy of 69.98% after 10 epochs. The FFT frequency domain method had a validation accuracy of 52.87% after 10 epochs, significantly lower than the other two methods. The study demonstrates that deep learning is a promising approach for image classification tasks and outperforms traditional methods such as spatial and frequency domain techniques

    ๋”ฅ๋Ÿฌ๋‹์„ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ์ €์„ ๋Ÿ‰ ์ „์‚ฐํ™” ๋‹จ์ธต์ดฌ์˜์˜ ์˜์ƒ ํ™”์งˆ ํ–ฅ์ƒ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (๋ฐ•์‚ฌ)-- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์˜๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์ž„์ƒ์˜๊ณผํ•™๊ณผ, 2019. 2. ๊น€์˜ํ›ˆ.์„œ๋ก : ์ €์„ ๋Ÿ‰ ์ „์‚ฐํ™” ๋‹จ์ธต์ดฌ์˜์—์„œ FBP (filtered back projection) ๋ฐ ADMIRE (advanced modeled iterative reconstruction)์™€ ๋น„๊ตํ•˜์—ฌ ๋”ฅ๋Ÿฌ๋‹ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ์ฆ˜ (deep learning algorithmDLA)์„ ์ด์šฉํ•˜์˜€์„ ๋•Œ์˜ ์˜์ƒ ํ™”์งˆ ํ–ฅ์ƒ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ด๋‹ค. ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•: ์ด ํ›„ํ–ฅ์  ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๊ธฐ๊ด€ ๊ฒ€ํ† ์œ„์›ํšŒ์˜ ์Šน์ธ์„ ๋ฐ›์•˜๋‹ค. FBP๋ฅผ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ์ •์ƒ ์„ ๋Ÿ‰ (routine dose, RD) ๋ณต๋ถ€ CT๋ฅผ ์‹œํ–‰ํ•œ ์ด 100 ๋ช…์˜ ํ™˜์ž๋ฅผ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋”ฅ๋Ÿฌ๋‹ ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ์ฆ˜์˜ ํ›ˆ๋ จ ์„ธํŠธ๋ฅผ ๋งŒ๋“ค์—ˆ๋‹ค. RD CT ์˜์ƒ์œผ๋กœ๋ถ€ํ„ฐ 13 %, 25 %, 50 %์˜ ์„ ๋Ÿ‰ ์ˆ˜์ค€์˜ ์ €์„ ๋Ÿ‰ CT ์˜์ƒ์„ ์‹œ๋ฎฌ๋ ˆ์ด์…˜ํ•˜๊ณ  FBP๋ฅผ ์ด์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ์žฌ๊ตฌ์„ฑํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์šฐ๋ฆฌ๋Š” ์‹œ๋ฎฌ๋ ˆ์ด์…˜ ๋œ ์ €์„ ๋Ÿ‰ CT ์ด๋ฏธ์ง€๋ฅผ ์ž…๋ ฅ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋กœ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๊ณ  ์ •์ƒ์„ ๋Ÿ‰ CT ์ด๋ฏธ์ง€๋ฅผ ์ •๋‹ต์œผ๋กœ ํ•˜์—ฌ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์กฐ๊ฑด์—์„œ DLA๋ฅผ ํ›ˆ๋ จ์‹œ์ผฐ๋‹ค. DLA์˜ ์œ ํšจ์„ฑ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ํ‰๊ท ํ™” ์ œ๊ณฑ ์˜ค๋ฅ˜ (Mean squared error, MSE)๋ฅผ ์˜์ธํ™” ํŒฌํ…€์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ์ธก์ •ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ํ›ˆ๋ จ๊ณผ ๊ฒ€์ฆ์„ ๊ฑฐ์นœ DLA๋ฅผ ์‹œํ—˜ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ํŒฌํ…€์„ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์™€, 18๋ช…์˜ ์ €์„ ๋Ÿ‰ ๋ณต๋ถ€ CT๋ฅผ ์‹œํ–‰ํ•œ ํ™˜์ž๋ฅผ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ฐ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ FBP, ADMIRE ๋ฐ DLA๋ฅผ ์ด์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ํŒฌํ…€ ๋ฐ ํ™˜์ž์˜ ์ €์„ ๋Ÿ‰ CT ์˜์ƒ์„ ์žฌ๊ตฌ์„ฑํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ฐ๊ฐ์˜ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์œผ๋กœ ์žฌ๊ตฌ์„ฑ๋œ ์˜์ƒ์—์„œ ์˜์ƒ ํ’ˆ์งˆ์„ ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธํ•˜๊ณ  ๋น„๊ตํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ, ACR ํŒฌํ…€์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ์žก์Œ ์ „๋ ฅ ์ŠคํŽ™ํŠธ๋Ÿผ (noise power spectrum, NPS)๊ณผ ๋ณ€์กฐ ์ „๋‹ฌ ํ•จ์ˆ˜ (modulation transfer function, MTF)๋ฅผ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜๊ณ  ํ™˜์ž ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ํ‰๊ท  ์˜์ƒ ์žก์Œ(mean image noise)์„ ์ธก์ •ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ: LD-DLA๋Š” ํŒฌํ…€ ๋ฐ ํ™˜์ž ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ชจ๋‘์—์„œ LD-FBP ๋ฐ LD-ADMIRE๋ณด๋‹ค ๋‚ฎ์€ ์žก์Œ ์ˆ˜์ค€์„ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค. ํŒฌํ…€ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ, LD-DLA์˜ NPS ๊ณก์„ ์˜ ํ”ผํฌ ๊ฐ’๊ณผ AUC๋Š” LD-FBP ๋˜๋Š” LD-ADMIRE๋ณด๋‹ค ๋‚ฎ์•˜๋‹ค. ํ™˜์ž ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ LD-DLA ์ด๋ฏธ์ง€๋Š” LD-ADMIRE ์ด๋ฏธ์ง€๋ณด๋‹ค ์œ ์˜ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ๋‚ฎ์€ ํ‰๊ท  ์ด๋ฏธ์ง€ ๋…ธ์ด์ฆˆ๋ฅผ ๋ณด์˜€๊ณ  (๋ชจ๋‘ p <0.001), ์ถ”๊ฐ€ ์ธ๊ณต๋ฌผ๋„ ๋ณด์ด์ง€ ์•Š์•˜๋‹ค. ๊ฒฐ๋ก : LD-DLA ์˜์ƒ์€ LD-FBP ๋ฐ LD-ADMIRE ์˜์ƒ๋ณด๋‹ค ์žก์Œ์ด ์ ์Œ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ฃผ์—ˆ์ง€๋งŒ ๊ณต๊ฐ„ ๋ถ„ํ•ด๋Šฅ์€ ๊ฐœ์„ ์‹œํ‚ค์ง€ ๋ชปํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ๋” ์ ์€ ๋ฐฉ์‚ฌ์„ ๋Ÿ‰์œผ๋กœ ์ดฌ์˜ํ•œ ์ด๋ฏธ์ง€๋กœ ํ›ˆ๋ จํ•œ DLA์ผ์ˆ˜๋ก ์žก์Œ์ด ์ ๊ฒŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค.Introduction: To assess the image quality of low-dose (LD) computed tomography (CT) using a deep learning based denoising algorithm (DLA) compared with filtered back projection (FBP) and advanced modeled iterative reconstruction (ADMIRE). Materials and Methods: A total of 100 patients who had undergone routine dose (RD) abdominal CT reconstructed with FBP were included to build the DLA training set. CT images at dose levels corresponding to 13%, 25%, and 50% of RD were simulated from RD CT images and reconstructed using FBP. We trained three DLAs using the simulated LD CT images with different dose levels as input data and the RD CT images as the ground truth (DLA-1, 2, 3 for 13%, 25%, and 50% dose levels, respectively). The American College of Radiology (ACR) CT phantom was used together with 18 patients who underwent abdominal LD CT to build a testing set. LD CT images of phantom and patients were reconstructed using FBP, ADMIRE, and processed using DLAs (LD-FBP, LD-ADMIRE, LD-DLA images). To compare the quality of reconstructed and processed images, we measured noise power spectrum (NPS) and modulation transfer function (MTF) for various contrast objects in phantom images, and mean image noises in patient data. Statistical analysis was performed using paired t-tests and repeated measure analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction for pairwise comparisons. In addition, we evaluated the presence of additional artifacts in LD-DLA images. Results: LD-DLAs achieved lower noise levels than LD-FBP and LD-ADMIRE in both phantom and patient studies (all p < 0.001), and LD-DLAs trained with lower radiation doses showed less image noise. There were no additional image artifacts in LD-DLA images. However, the MTFs of the LD-DLAs were significantly lower than those of LD-ADMIRE and LD-FBP (all p < 0.001) and decreased with decreasing training image dose, although the differences between the LD-DLAs and LD-FBP were minimal. Conclusions: DLAs achieved less noise than FBP and ADMIRE in LD CT images, but did not maintain spatial resolution. Lower radiation doses in training images led to less noise.Introduction. 1 Material and methods. 5 Results 13 Discussion. 17 Acknowledgement 24 Reference 25 Abstract in Korean 41Docto

    On the impact of incorporating task-information in learning-based image denoising

    Full text link
    A variety of deep neural network (DNN)-based image denoising methods have been proposed for use with medical images. These methods are typically trained by minimizing loss functions that quantify a distance between the denoised image, or a transformed version of it, and the defined target image (e.g., a noise-free or low-noise image). They have demonstrated high performance in terms of traditional image quality metrics such as root mean square error (RMSE), structural similarity index measure (SSIM), or peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR). However, it has been reported recently that such denoising methods may not always improve objective measures of image quality. In this work, a task-informed DNN-based image denoising method was established and systematically evaluated. A transfer learning approach was employed, in which the DNN is first pre-trained by use of a conventional (non-task-informed) loss function and subsequently fine-tuned by use of the hybrid loss that includes a task-component. The task-component was designed to measure the performance of a numerical observer (NO) on a signal detection task. The impact of network depth and constraining the fine-tuning to specific layers of the DNN was explored. The task-informed training method was investigated in a stylized low-dose X-ray computed tomography (CT) denoising study for which binary signal detection tasks under signal-known-statistically (SKS) with background-known-statistically (BKS) conditions were considered. The impact of changing the specified task at inference time to be different from that employed for model training, a phenomenon we refer to as "task-shift", was also investigated. The presented results indicate that the task-informed training method can improve observer performance while providing control over the trade off between traditional and task-based measures of image quality

    Residual Back Projection With Untrained Neural Networks

    Full text link
    Background and Objective: The success of neural networks in a number of image processing tasks has motivated their application in image reconstruction problems in computed tomography (CT). While progress has been made in this area, the lack of stability and theoretical guarantees for accuracy, together with the scarcity of high-quality training data for specific imaging domains pose challenges for many CT applications. In this paper, we present a framework for iterative reconstruction (IR) in CT that leverages the hierarchical structure of neural networks, without the need for training. Our framework incorporates this structural information as a deep image prior (DIP), and uses a novel residual back projection (RBP) connection that forms the basis for our iterations. Methods: We propose using an untrained U-net in conjunction with a novel residual back projection to minimize an objective function and achieve high-accuracy reconstruction. In each iteration, the weights of the untrained U-net are optimized, and the output of the U-net in the current iteration is used to update the input of the U-net in the next iteration through the aforementioned RBP connection. Results: Experimental results demonstrate that the RBP-DIP framework offers improvements over other state-of-the-art conventional IR methods, as well as pre-trained and untrained models with similar network structures under multiple conditions. These improvements are particularly significant in the few-view, limited-angle, and low-dose imaging configurations. Conclusions: Applying to both parallel and fan beam X-ray imaging, our framework shows significant improvement under multiple conditions. Furthermore, the proposed framework requires no training data and can be adjusted on-demand to adapt to different conditions (e.g. noise level, geometry, and imaged object)
    corecore