Fig 1.
Parallel Projection: an object f(x, y) and its projection pθ(t) from angle θ.
Fig 2.
Reconstruction from the filtered projection: the linear interpolation procedure.
Fig 3.
The flowchart of the iterative FBP algorithm.
Fig 4.
The original projection vector , the reprojection vector,
, and the corrected projection vector,
, for the head phantom of size 128 × 128 and θ = 47°.
(a) The whole vector, (b) the portion of the black in (a).
Table 1.
MSE of the different projection and the original projection.
Fig 5.
The original image and its reconstructed versions by different schemes.
(a) The original image(128 × 128), (b) the reconstructed image using the classic FBP, (c) the reconstructed image using the iterative FBP.
Table 2.
The performance evaluation in Example 2.
Table 3.
The compare of reconstruction performance between SIRT, SART, MAP-EM and Iterative FBP (the image size is 512 × 512 and the angle interval is 0.5°).
Fig 6.
(a) The compare of MSE using MAP-EM and Iterative FBP. (b) is the portion of the first 60s of (a).
Fig 7.
(a) The compare of MSE using SART and Iterative FBP. (b) is the portion of the first 60s of (a).
Fig 8.
The images of mouse liver reconstructed using different schemes.
(a) The image using the classic FBP, (b) using the iterative FBP, (c) and (d) are the portions of (a) and (b), respectively.