Levine, Z.
, Blattner, T.
, Peskin, A.
and Pintar, A.
(2019),
Scatter corrections in x-ray computed tomography: a physics-based analysis, Journal of Research (NIST JRES), National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, [online], https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.124.013, https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=927049
(Accessed December 26, 2024)
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock (
) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
Scatter corrections in x-ray computed tomography: a physics-based analysis
Published
Author(s)
, , ,
Abstract
Fundamental limits for the calculation of scattering corrections within X-ray computed tomography (CT) are found within the independent atom approximation from an analysis of the cross sections, CT geometry, and the Nyquist sampling theorem, suggesting large reductions in computational time compared to existing methods. By modifying the scatter by less than 1 %, it is possible to treat some of the elastic scattering in the forward direction as inelastic to achieve a smoother elastic scattering distribution. We present an analysis showing that the number of samples required for the smoother distribution can be greatly reduced. We show that fixed forced detection can be used with many fewer points for inelastic scattering, but that for pure elastic scattering, a standard Monte Carlo calculation is preferred. We use smoothing for both elastic and inelastic scattering because the intrinsic angular resolution is much poorer than can be achieved for projective tomography. Representative numerical examples are given. We show that forced, fixed detection can be used with many fewer points for inelastic scattering, but that for pure elastic scattering, ordinary Monte Carlo is preferred. We use smoothing for both elastic and inelastic scattering because their intrinsic angular resolution is much poorer than can be achieved for projective tomography. Representative numerical examples are given.Citation
Journal of Research (NIST JRES) -
Volume
124
NIST Pub Series
Pub Type
NIST Pubs
Download Paper
Citation
Issues
If you have any questions about this publication or are having problems accessing it, please contact reflib@nist.gov.
Created May 21, 2019, Updated October 12, 2021