Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
NO I , MARCH 1988 59
Abstract-We develop a relatively unexplored algorithm for recon- quantity and let FR( U , V ) be its Fourier transform:
structing a two-dimensional image from a finite set of its sampled pro-
jections. The algorithm, which we refer to as the Hankel-transform re-
construction (HTR) algorithm, is polar-coordinate based. The algo-
rithm expands the polar-form Fourier transform F ( r , 0 ) of an image
into a Fourier series in 0; calculates the appropriately ordered Hankel
transform of the coefficients of this series, giving the coefficients for the
Fourier series of the polar-form image f( p , 6);resolves this series, The polar-coordinate analog of (1) is
giving a polar-form reconstruction; and finally, if desired, interpolates
this reconstruction to a rectilinear grid. We outline the HTR algorithm
and show that its performance can compare favorably to the popular
convolution-backprojection algorithm.
(2)
where p and r are radial variables and 4 and e are angular
I. INTRODUCTION variables. Both fR( U , U ) and f ( p , 4 ) refer to the same
two-dimensional quantity-we will refer to this quantity
aperture radar (spotlight-mode SAR) [ 11-[ 171. In CAT, pe(t)= f R ( t cos e -y sin 8, t sin e + y cos e) dy.
the object frequently is a two-dimensional slice of the hu- -w
-w
pe(t)e-'" dt, (4 1
compare it to the well-known convolution-backprojection equals the central slice at angle 8 of the two-dimensional
algorithm [3]-[9]. Fourier transform Of&, i.e.,
For notational consistency, quantities with the sub-
script R are in rectilinear coordinates; those without the ~ ~ (= r~ ), ( COS
r e, r sin e) = ~ ( re ,) . (5)
subscript are in polar coordinates. Also, quantities de- Theoretically, if all of the projections pe ( t ) or if all of
noted by capital letters are in the Fourier domain; those
denoted by small letters are in either the spatial domain
e)
the slices of the Fourier transform F ( r, were available,
then we could reconstruct fR exactly 121, [6], [8], [29]. In
or projection domain. Other notations will be described practice, however, one of two situations usually exists.
as they arise. 1) Only a finite set of sampled projections are available
Let f R( U , U ) denote the intensity of a two-dimensional (as in X-ray CAT [1]-[7], [9]).
2) Only a finite set of sampled slices of the Fourier
Manuscript received August 18, 1986; revised September 25, 1987. This transform are available (as in nuclear-magnetic-resonance
work was supported by the Joint Services Electronics Program under Con- CAT and spotlight-mode SAR [lo], 1161, 1171); this sit-
tract N00014-79-(2-0424 and by a fellowship from the Shell Oil Company.
W. E. Higgins is with the Biodynamics Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, uation corresponds to having a set of samples of the Fou-
Rochester, MN 55905. rier transform on a polar grid.
D. C. Munson, Jr. is with the Coordinated Science Laboratory and the Unfortunately, neither of these sets guarantees a unique
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Illi-
nois, Urbana, IL 61801. reconstruction under practical circumstances [6], [29]. In
IEEE Log Number 8718245. fact, Smith et al. go so far as to say that a finite set of
projections says nothing at all about f R [30]. Also, Sanz to compare favorably to those of the CBP algorithm [4],
has shown that no strategy exists for sampling a general, [6]. Also, they typically require several iterations to gen-
bandlimited, two-dimensional signal on a polar grid so erate an acceptable reconstruction, each iteration taking
that the samples uniquely specify the signal [3 11. By mak- roughly the computation of the CBP algorithm [6].
ing appropriate assumptions of f R , though, many algo- The CBP algorithm, probably the most popular algo-
rithms exist that are capable of using either set of data and rithm in CAT, first Fourier transforms the projections and
that can generate a good estimate offR. then essentially applies a discrete version of the inverse,
In this work, we refer to any estimate offR generated polar-form, two-dimensional Fourier transform to these
by some algorithm as a reconstruction of f R . Also, we computed samples [ 11-[9] .2 Experimental results show
assume that we start with a set of sampled projections and that it tends to give better reconstructions than the other
that we reconstruct fR on a discrete rectilinear grid. Be- approaches, but that it takes U ( N 3 )operations for an N
cause of the projection-slice theorem ( 5 ) and the neces- X N reconstruction [22].
sary bandlimitedness constraints invoked by any sampled- (As Herman and Rowland warn, however, any rea-
data formulation, data sets 1) and 2) above are nearly in- sonable algorithm can give the best reconstructions
terchangeable. relative to other algorithms, provided that the conditions
Two criteria influence the usefulness of a particular im- are right [20]. Also, quality of reconstruction is a
age reconstruction algorithm: hard criterion to quantify. Measures of quality, such as
1) the quality of reconstructions it gives, mean-squared error, average error, or maximum error,
2) the complexity of the algorithms implementation. cannot adequately capture quality as the human brain per-
Many algorithms that trade off these factors have been ceives it [20] .)
proposed. While the quality of the reconstructions tends The CBP algorithm, being polar-coordinate based, can
to be the overriding factor, an algorithms complexity, perform a direct Fourier inversion on the polar-grid Fou-
which encompasses the computational and storage re- rier-transform samples of f R . The direct Fourier tech-
quirements, does become a major consideration in situa- niques, on the other hand, first interpolate the polar-grid
tions involving large data arrays. Fourier-transform samples to a rectilinear grid and then
Since the algorithms we consider in this paper demand perform the inversion. Since each interpolated Fourier-
similar memory requirements, we assume that the com- transform sample contributes to every point in the recon-
plexity of an algorithms implementation depends primar- struction and since interpolation introduces error, each in-
ily on the algorithms computational requirements. terpolated Fourier-transform sample introduces error into
Three major classes of digital image-reconstruction al- every point in the reconstruction. Using the polar-grid
gorithms have been studied by researchers previously: samples directly intuitively seems to exploit the given in-
1) direct Fourier techniques, formation better.
2) algebraic reconstruction techniques, An algorithm for computing general integer-order Han-
3) the convolution-backprojection (CBP) algorithm. kel transforms, described in [32], makes another digital
(Other approaches exist that are variations on the above image-reconstruction algorithm which we will refer to as
113, [51, [61, [181, [23l.) the Hankel-transform reconstruction (HTR) algorithm,
The direct Fourier techniques reconstruct fR in three computationally viable. The HTR algorithm, being polar-
steps: 1) compute the set of sampled slices of the Fourier coordinate based, also can use the polar-grid Fourier-
transform from the projections, 2) interpolate the known transform samples directly. It expands the Fourier trans-
polar-grid Fourier transform samples to a rectilinear grid, form into a Fourier series and then performs a series of
and 3) perform an inverse two-dimensional fast Fourier appropriate-order Hankel transforms on the coefficients of
transform (FFT) on the rectilinear-grid samples [8], [ 121, this series to give a set of coefficients of a Fourier series
[22], [23]. Step 1) is, of course, unnecessary if slices of for the reconstructed image. Resolving this second Fou-
the Fourier transform are given. Many options exist for rier series gives a polar-form reconstruction, which can
performing the interpolation of step 2). Stark et al. have be interpolated to a rectilinear grid.
demonstrated an approach that gives reconstructions ap- The HTR algorithm has previously been studied by
proaching the quality of those made with the CBP algo- Klug et al. for the reconstruction of viruses (three-dimen-
rithm and that takes between U ( N 2 log2 N ) and U ( N 3 ) sional structures) from electron micrographs [ 131-[ 151.
computations for an N x N reconstruction [22]. However, the structures that Klug et al. tried to recon-
The algebraic reconstruction techniques reconstruct fR struct possessed a great deal of symmetry. Hence, not only
by iteratively solving a set of linear equations [4], [6], did they not have to compute a series of Hankel trans-
[ 181-[2 13. These equations relate the available set of sam- forms-a computationally demanding operation-but they
pled projections to the desired discrete reconstruction grid. also did not need a large set of projections to make a re-
The reconstructions from this class of algorithms tend not construction.
Norton considered a Hankel-transform-based approach
While both the direct Fourier techniques and the CBP algorithm arise
from the projection-slice theorem, their implementations differ greatly [8]. *Some implementations of the CBP algorithm do not Fourier transform
Thus, we consider them to be two different classes of algorithms. the projections per se, but their net overall operations are equivalent [3].
-
to reconstructing the acoustic reflectivity of an object, Further, f( p , 4), being periodic in 4 with period 2 n , can
given measurements of echoes of an active acoustic ele- also be expanded into a Fourier series:
ment [27]. The measurements represent line integrals
(projections) of the acoustic echoes on concentric arcs
about the source of the active element. Because we con-
sider the case where the projections are computed on lin-
ear contours [see (3)], the mathematical formulation of
our problem differs considerably from Norton's.
Finally, Shenberg and Macovski applied an approach where, analogous to (7),
drawing upon Hankel transforms to a magnetic-resonance
imaging system [28]. They were interested in reconstruc-
ting a 2-D image from samples of a time-varying mag-
netization signal. Again, their application has a consid-
erably different mathematical formulation from our prob- (Excuse the awkward angular coordinate (( n / 2 ) - 4 )
lem (they, for example, do not strictly require collecting used forf( p , ) in (8) and (9) for the time being.)
multiple projections). It can be shown that the inverse two-dimensional Fou-
For the general scenario, we consider, where no sym- rier transform of each term F,,( r ) e-'"" in ( 6 ) is given by
metry exists in the object of interest and a complete series
C331
of projections ( t ) spanning 8 over [0, n) is needed, no
general study of the HTR algorithm as a digital image
reconstruction algorithm has been done.
In this paper, we develop the HTR algorithm as a gen-
eral digital image reconstruction algorithm and compare
it to the CBP algorithm. Since both the HTR and CBP
algorithms are polar-coordinate based and arise from the and that f n ( p ) may be written as the nth-order Hankel
projection-slice theorem, a comparison of the two ap- transform of F, ( r ) :
proaches is enlightening.
The remainder of this paper takes the following form.
Section I1 outlines the theory underlying the HTR algo-
rithm. Section I11 describes a discrete implementation of
the theoretical relations defining the HTR algorithm. Sec-
tion IV describes the errors arising in the algorithm and
discusses some practical considerations. Section V pro- F-' { * } denotes the inverse two-dimensional Fourier
vides computational examples that test the importance of transformation (2) and J , ( ) is the n th-order Bessel func-
certain parameters in the HTR algorithm and that also test tion of the first kind.
the HTR algorithm's response to noisy input projections. Thus, the Fourier series for the Fourier transform F ( r ,
These examples also demonstrate that the HTR algorithm 8 ) and the imagef( p , (7r/2) - 4 ) are linked through
can compare favorably, both in the quality of the recon- their coefficients by the equivalent relations (10) and (1 1).
structions and in the amount of computation, to the CBP We shall use (11) which states that the n th Fourier-series
algorithm. Finally, Section VI offers some concluding coefficient for f( p , ( n / 2 ) - 4 ) equals the n th-order
comments. Hankel transform of the n th Fourier-series coefficient of
F ( r , 0).
Given that we start with projections P e ( t ) , (4),(5), (7),
11. UNDERLYING
THEORYOF THE HTR ALGORITHM (8), and (1 1) make up the basic HTR algorithm.
Note that the desired reconstruction is f ( p , e ) , which
The Fourier transform F ( r , e ) , being periodic in 0 with can also be written as
period 2 n , can be expanded into a Fourier series in 8:
(7)
62 IBEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING. VOL. 7. NO. I. MARCH 1988
The discrepancy (12) is easily accounted for by properly plete range of 0 over [0, a ) (equally spaced in e), is avail-
interpreting the reconstruction from (8) (i.e., merely in- able.
terchange the U , U coordinates-see Section III).3 2) Each projection is of finite extent in t , uniformly
We will assume that f ( p , 4 ) [analogously f( p , ( ~ / 2 ) sampled in t , and spans the width of the image. Thus, if
- 4 ) ] is real, as would be the case in X-ray CAT. Then the image lies completely within a square of width W ,
from (9), then each projection covers values of t over a range of
length & W .
fn(p) =f*n(p), n = 0 , 1, * * * (13) 3) The final reconstruction of fR(U, v ) conforms to a
where ()* denotes the complex conjugate. Thus, we need discrete rectilinear grid. Note that this assumption im-
only compute thef,( p ) for n I0. Further, because f is plicitly places a support limit on F R ( U , V ) [or F( r, e)],
real, (1) implies that i.e.,
FR( -U, -V) = Fz( U, V ) F R ( ~V, ) 0, [U(, >R
or in polar-coordinate form,
where R 5 a / A u ( A u and A v are the U and v sample
F(r, e ) = F*(r, e + T). (14) spacings and A u = A V ) . The discrete implementation re-
Equation (14) simplifies the discrete implementations of quires five steps. Below, these are summarized.
(4) and (7) since only values of F ( r, e ) ranging from 0 1) Compute sampled slices of the Fourier transform
to a need to be considered. F ( r , e), using a discrete form of (4)-(5).
In the discrete implementation, we will not use (1 1) di- Computing these slices is straightforward and can be
rectly to compute the coefficients fn( p ) . Instead, we will done using a fast Fourier transform (FFT) 1361.
use the relations derived in 1321 2) Compute the set of coeficients F,, ( r ) , using discrete
forms of (7)and (14).
Note that the computed slices of F ( r, e ) span 8 from
0 to T [per assumption l)]. Thus, (14) implies that
only samples of F( r, 0 ) corresponding to r I0 need
$
m
be retained for this step. The discrete analog of (7)
+,,(q) = ) r l F,,(r)e"" dr (16)
-m used here can also be computed with an FFT.
3) Evaluate the appropriate order Hankel transform for
12ST'*0
a,,(p sin 'k) Re [e-'"'] d ' k ,
each F,, (r)-this gives the coe8cient.s f,,( p ) ; use discrete
forms of (15)-(17).
Computing a coefficientf, ( p ) is a two-step process:
n even (17) a) computing samples of +,,(v), and b) using the
samples of +,,(q) in a discrete form of (17) to get
+,( p sin 'k) Im [e-'"'] d'k, f , ( p ) . Reference [32] gives a detailed discussion of
a discrete algorithm for computing the f,( p ) . We
[ n odd point out that the I r 1 function in (16) requires spe-
to compute the f n ( p ) . Relations (15)-(17) avoid the Bes- cial attention, particularly for n = 0-not handling
se1 functions present in (1 1) and result in a computation- the I r I function judiciously results in severe dc shifts
ally efficient procedure for computing thef, ( p ) [32]. The in reconstructed images 13.51. Note that to compute
f n ( p ) with a discrete form of (17) requires interpo-
next section discusses implementation of (4), (3,(7), (8),
and (13)-(17). lation in q of the samples of +,,(q) 1321. Also, in
view of (13), only thef, ( p ) for n I0 need be com-
111. DISCRETE IMPLEMENTATION puted. Further, f n ( p ) need only be computed for p
This section outlines a discrete implementation of the 1 0.
HTR algorithm. Our intents are to describe a general step- 4) Resolve the Fourier series for f ( p , (?r/2) - 4),
by-step procedure, point out pitfalls in discretizing the ex- using a discrete version of (8).
act relations of Section 11, and offer a discussion on the The discrete analog of (8) can also be computed with
algorithm's computational complexity. Reference [35] an FFT. One should use (13) to get negative-order
describes in depth our specific implementation of the HTR coefficients f,( p ). The result of this step gives a re-
algorithm. First, we list the key assumptions we make in construction of f defined on a discrete polar grid.
the discrete implementation. 5) Interpolate the polar-grid samples of the recon-
1) A finite set of projections pe ( t ), spanning the com- struction to a rectilinear grid.
Reference [35] describes four simple interpolation
techniques (nearest neighbor, inverse distance, bi-
31t is possible to avoid the quantityf( p , ( ? r / 2 ) - 4 ) in the derivation linear, and planar) for computing a rectilinear grid
of the basic HTR equations. Doing this, though, results in either extra
multiplicative factors or a more complex set of equations for computing of samples from the polar-grid samples of f ( p ,
the Hankel transforms [34]. ( a / 2 ) - 4). Note, however, that the resulting rec-
HIGGINS A N D MUNSON: HANKEL TRANSFORM APPROACH T O IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION 63
k(4) = c
n=-(D-l)
,,eJn4. (23)
The function k ( + ) of (23) has the following properties: lated impulse, while the 16-coefficient reconstruction has
1) periodic with period 2n, 2) has main lobe width a wide mainlobe in the 4 direction and significant ripple
4 a / ( 2 D - l), and 3) is negative for some 4. Thus, trun- around a circle.
cating the Fourier series (8) forf( p , 4), which is equiv- As we will see in Section V, the ripple can significantly
alent to convolvingf( p , 4 ) with k ( 4), manifests itself in degrade a reconstruction. Picking appropriate weights
the following ways. { w, 1 for k ( 4)-this is equivalent to using the weighted
1) For each p , the reconstruction is smeared in the coefficients w,f, ( p ) in place off, ( p ) in the discrete im-
angular variable 4; in particular, edges and lines infD are plementation [step 4)]-can greatly reduce the ripple at
smeared. the expense of losing some resolution. Among the possi-
bilities devised by mathematicians are the Fejer weights
2) Parts of fD ( p , 4 ) may be negative, even though f ( p ,
4 ) is typically nonnegative (as in the cases when f rep- [33] and Lanczoss sigma factors [41]. The Fejer weights,
resents intensity or density). in particular, can preserve the nonnegativity o f f in f D ;
3) The angular resolution of the reconstruction gets unfortunately, they tend to overly compromise the reso-
limited by roughly the mainlobe width of k (4); since the lution [33]. Standard digital signal processing windows
angular resolution does not depend on p , the convolution can also serve as suitable weights [I], [36].
effectively imposes an assumption of angular bandlimit- The error from using approximate coefficients f,( p ) is
edness. Thus, for a constant angular resolution, the real bounded by [30], (341
resolution becomes poorer as p increases. D- I
How these effects worsen a reconstruction can be stud-
ied by looking at the reconstruction of an impulse. Fig. 1
gives the reconstruction of an impulse for two cases. No-
tice how the 64-coefficient reconstruction depicts an iso-
HlGGlNS AND MUNSON: HANKEL TRANSFORM APPROACH TO IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION 65
V. COMPUTATIONAL
EXAMPLES
-
Fig. 2 . Geometry of the Shepp and Logan head phantom. The numbers
This section examines the performance of the digital indicate relative intensity. For a list of parameters defining this diagram,
HTR algorithm and also how the algorithm compares to see [4].
the CBP a l g ~ r i t h m . ~
The reconstructions are done with the Shepp and Logan
head phantom [4]. This example, composed of 1 1 super-
imposed ellipses, simulates a horizontal cross section of
the human head. The ellipses model the skull, brain mat-
ter, various brain lobes, and several possible brain de-
fects. Reference [4] describes the parameters for the head
phantom in more detail.
When a cross section of the head is imaged by an X-
ray CAT scanner, the resulting reconstruction includes
both the skull and the brain. If the skull has its intensity
set to = 1 .O, the brain matter may have intensities vary-
ing over a small range-roughly between 0.00 and 0.06.
(We assume, as Shepp and Logan do, that a water bag
surrounds the skull [4].) The brains narrow range of in- Fig. 3. Exact 128 x 128 display of Shepp and Logan head phantom. In-
tensities, though, contains the interesting information tensities from 0.00 to 0.06 are mapped linearly onto a 0-255 gray scale.
Intensities above 0.06 are set to 255.
(e.g., brain lobes, tumors, blood clots). The Shepp and
Logan head phantom incorporates this severe intensity
constraint, and therefore gives a realistic, demanding test 127 samples per projection, and they assume the dimen-
of an image reconstruction algorithm. sions of Fig. 2 ( G = 128).
Another advantage of the head phantom is that its pro- Figs. 4, 5, 6, 7 , 9, and 10 illustrate reconstructions of
jections pe ( I ) can be computed analytically. One need the head phantom made with the HTR algorithm. For HTR
only know the expression for the projection of a general reconstructions, we fix the following parameters (see Ta-
rotated and translated ellipse-Rosenfeld and Kak [7] give ble I): C = 256, L = 128, P = 128, and S = 128.
this expression. Using the linearity of the projection op- All of these reconstructions feature a greatly widened
eration, the projection ( t ) of the head phantom can be skull. This comes about partly from the necessary win-
computed by summing the contributions of each of the 1 1 dowing of the Fourier-transform samples F ( r , e) in the
ellipses. We thus can start with exact projections in sim- discrete implementation of (7). The windowing (low-pass
ulations. filtering) of the Fourier-transform samples smears the
Fig. 2 gives a plot of the head phantom along with the skull near its discontinuities in intensity. Further, while
intensities of its components. Fig. 3 gives an exact 128 much of this extraneous smeared region has a low inten-
x 128 display. For our simulations, we use a 0-255 lin- sity relative to the skull, it does not necessarily have a
ear gray scale representing intensities from 0.00 to 0.06; low intensity relative to the gray scale. (Remember that
those intensities above 0.06 are set to 255. All reconstruc- the skull has nominal intensity 1.0, while the gray scale
tions in this section use 128 projections ( A = 128) having only covers intensities ranging from 0.00 to 0.06.)
All of the reconstructions also have clutter outside the
+Reference [42] gives some preliminary results on the comparison be- skull. This comes about from three sources. First, recon-
tween the HTR algorithm and the CBP algorithm. structing with only a finite number of sampled projections
66 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, VOL. 7, NO. I . MARCH 1988
Fig. 4. Test of coefficient weighting schemes for the HTR algorithm. The
reconstructions use D = 64, Q =' 128, and bilinear interpolation for the
final polar-to-rectilinear interpolation in step 5) (see Section 111). Also,
the Hankel transforms fn ( p ) are computed using linear interpolation in
(17) [32] and the I rl kernel suggested in [35] [see the discussion in
Section 111 regarding (16)]. (a) Truncation weighting. (b) Hamming
weights.
ter within the skull. Shepp andLogan proved that the re-
construction error of an ellipse (or constant spatially lim-
ited figures in general) in the CBP algorithm is much
greater outside the ellipse than inside [4].They linked this
behavior to a step in the algorithm that essentially takes
the derivative of the Hilbert transform of the projections
(see (26) further on). Since the algorithm we use to com-
pute Hankel transforms has an operation similar to this,
namely (16), errors in the coefficients f n ( p ) will exhibit
similar behavior. These errors will then in turn be distrib-
uted around circles in the polar-form reconstruction.
As we saw in Section 111, a discrete implementation of
(8) must by necessity truncate the infinite Fourier series
forf. Section IV pointed out, though, that a blind trun- (d)
cation Can result in large reCOnStruCtiOn artifacts. TO avoid Fig. 5. Test of varying the number of coefficients D for the HTR algo-
generating excessive artifacts, we recommend weighting rithm. Hamming weights used in step 4). The Hankel transform algo-
rithm uses nearest neighbor interpolation in (17) [32]. All other condi-
the coefficients f n( p ). tions are the same as those in Fig. 4. (a) D = 128. (b) D = 64. (c) D =
Fig. 4 depicts reconstructions for two weighting 32. (d) D = 16.
~
(b)
Fig. 7. Varying the number of slices Q of the polar-grid reconstruction in
the HTR algorithm. All other parameters are the same as those of Fig.
5(b). (a) Q = 256. (b) Q = 64.
Fig. 10. HTR reconstruction that uses a naive version of ( r ( in (16) in-
stead of the modified 1 r \ suggested in [35].All other parameters are the
same as Fig. 5(b).
0 . 0 6
0 . 0 4
0 . 0 2
0 5 0 1 0 0 1 5 0
Fig. 11. Plot of the v = -0.606 line for the reconstruction of Fig. 10.
TABLE 111
SUMMARY
OF COMPUTATIONS
FOR THE CBP ALGORITHM
Number of
Computations Type of Computation
VI. CONCLUSION
0 . 0 0 We explored an algorithm, which we referred to as the
HTR algorithm, for digital image reconstruction from
0 5 0 1 8 0 1 5 8
projections. We first discussed the theory behind the al-
Fig. 13. Profile of the v = -0.606 line for the CBP reconstruction. gorithm, and then outlined a five-step discrete implemen-
tation. An analysis of the approximations introduced by
head phantom falls within the range 0.00 and 0.06, this this implementation showed that the number of coeffi-
loss is severe. cients retained in the Fourier series for the reconstructed
Fig. 12 gives a reconstruction of the head phantom, image can have a significant impact on the quality of re-
made with the CBP algorithm, starting with the same constructions. Using too few coefficients gives poor res-
sampled projections as those used for all of the previous olution in the angular variable. Using too many may
reconstructions. Fig. 13 gives a profile of the U = -0.606 introduce further reconstruction error (high-order co-
line for this reconstruction. To generate Fig. 12, we im- efficients become dominated by error). We further found
plemented the equations that the algorithm effectively smears the image in con-
stant-radius circles-the fewer coefficients retained, the
1 - more severe this smearing. Further, if the projections are
Qe(t) = 4n2 -m
F ( r , 0 ) Irl ejrrdr (26) contaminated by white noise, then again retaining too
many coefficients can be harmful-the noise gain rises as
and the number of coefficients retained rises.
sults; we found, though, that simple bilinear interpolation Z. H. Cho, H. S . Kim, H. B. Song, and J. Cumming, Fourier trans-
form nuclear magnetic resonance tomographic imaging, Proc. IEEE,
is satisfactory. vol. 70, pp. 1152-1173, Oct. 1982.
4) Weights applied to the coefficients significantly re- Spectral issue on computerized tomography, Proc. IEEE, vol. 71,
duce noise and circular smearing. pp. 291-435, Mar. 1983.
R. N. Bracewell, Strip integration in radio astronomy, Aust. J .
5) The computation of the Hankel transforms domi- Phys., vol. 9 , pp. 198-217, June 1956.
nates the computation time of the algorithm; by reducing D. J. DeRosier and A. Klug, Reconstruction of three dimensional
structures from electron micrographs, Nature, vol. 217, pp. 130-
the number of coefficients (or streamlining the Hankel 134, Jan. 13, 1968.
transform algorithm [35]), we found that we could reduce R. A. Crowther et a l . , Three dimensional reconstructions of spher-
the computation by a factor of 2 or more and still generate ical viruses by Fourier synthesis from electron micrographs, Nature,
acceptable reconstructions; the I r 1 function in the Hankel vol. 226, pp. 421-425, May 2, 1970.
P. F.C. Gilbert, The reconstruction of a three-dimensional structure
transform algorithm, however, requires caution-naively from projections and its application to electron microscopy 11: Direct
ignoring the caution introduces a severe dc shift in the methods, Proc. Roy. Soc. London E , vol. 182, pp. 89-102, July 25,
1972.
image (our recommendation in [35] eradicates this diffi- D. C. Munson, Jr. and W. E. Higgins, Faster algorithms for com-
culty). puter-aided tomography and spotlight-mode synthetic aperture ra-
We also found that the HTR algorithm can give recon- dar?, in Proc. 16th Asilomar Conf. Circuits, Syst., Comput., Pacific
structions comparable to the CBP algorithm and take a Grove, CA, Nov. 1982, pp. 426-430.
D. C. Munson, Jr., J. D. OBrien, and W. K. Jenkins, A tomo-
factor of 2 (or more) less computation to generate a re- graphic formulation of spotlight-mode synthetic aperture radar,
construction. The algorithm is particularly well suited for Proc. IEEE, vol. 71, pp. 917-925, Aug. 1983.
approaches that begin with Fourier information. Since one Y. Censor, Series-expansion reconstruction methods, Proc. IEEE,
vol. 71, pp. 409-419, Mar. 1983.
has the freedom to control how many termsf, ( p ) e$ to G. N. Hounsfield, Method and apparatus for measuring X or y ra-
retain in the Fourier series for f and to weight individual diation absorption or transmission at plural angles and analyzing the
terms f,( p ) e j + , the HTR algorithm provides the flexi- data, U.S. Patent 3778614, Dec. 11, 1973.
G. T. Herman and S . W. Rowland, Three methods for reconstruct-
bility to modify individual components of an image. Also, ing objects from X rays: A comparative study, Comput. Graphics
since the HTR algorithm uses available polar-grid infor- h u g e Processing, vol. 2, pp. 151-178, Oct. 1973.
mation (be it projections or Fourier-transform slices) di- P. P. B. Eggermont, Tomographic reconstruction on a logarithmic
polar grid, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging, vol. MI-2, pp. 40-48, Mar.
rectly, it avoids the errors introduced into reconstructions 1983.
made by some other techniques. A drawback of the al- H. Stark, J. W. Woods, I. Paul, and R. Hingorani, Direct Fourier
gorithm is that it requires a polar-to-rectilinear interpola- reconstruction in computer tomography, IEEE Trans. Acoust.,
Speech, Signal Processing, vol. ASSP-29, pp. 237-245, Apr. 1981.
tion to display a reconstruction on standard rectilinear dis- R. W. Lewitt, Reconstruction methods: Transform methods, Proc.
plays-this step does not, however, require much IEEE, vol. 71, pp. 390-408, Mar. 1983.
computation. Since we have only examined two test im- J. B. Garrison, D. G. Grant, W. H. Guier, and R. J. Johns, Three-
dimensional roentgenography, Amer. J. Roentgenol., Rad. Ther-
ages (see [42] for some preliminary work) and used a rel- apy, Nucl. Med., vol. 60, no. 4 , pp. 903-908, 1969.
atively small set of projections, we cannot draw conclu- E. W. Hansen, Theory of circular harmonic image reconstruction,
sive results on the effectiveness of the HTR algorithm. J . Opt. Soc. Amer., vol. 71, pp. 304-308, Mar. 1981.
-, Circular harmonic image reconstruction: Experiments, Appl.
Overall, however, this work indicates that the HTR al- Opt., vol. 20, pp. 2266-2274, July 1, 1981.
gorithm could be a viable alternative to the CBP algorithm S . J. Norton, Reconstruction of a two-dimensional reflecting me-
for tomographic image reconstruction. dium over a circular domain: Exact solution, J. Acoust. Soc. Amer.,
vol. 67, pp. 1266-1273, Apr. 1980.
I. Shenberg and A. Macovski, Rapid magnetic resonance imaging
REFERENCES using the Hankel transform approach, in Proc. Int. Conf. Acoust.,
Speech, Signal Processing, Tokyo, Japan, Apr. 1986, pp. 34.1.1-
G. T. Herman, Ed., Image Reconstruction from Projections: Imple- 34.1.4.
mentations and Applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1979. A. K. Louis and F. Natterer, Mathematical problems of computer-
L. A. Shepp and J. B. Kruskal, Computerized tomography: the new ized tomography, Proc. IEEE, vol. 71, pp. 379-389, Mar. 1983.
medical x-ray technology, Amer. Math. Monthly, vol. 8 5 , pp. 420- K. T. Smith, D. C. Solmon, and S. L. Wagner, Practical and math-
438, June-July 1978. ematical aspects of the problem of reconstructing objects from ra-
G. N. Ramachandran and A. V. Lakshminarayanan, Three-dimen- diographs, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., vol. 83, pp. 1227-1270, Nov.
sional reconstruction from radiographs and electron micrographs: ap- 1977.
plication of convolutions instead of Fourier transforms, Proc. Nut. J. L. C. Sanz, Polar sampling and angularly bandlimited func-
Acad. Sei. USA, vol. 68, pp. 2236-2240, Sept. 1971. tions, Proc. IEEE, vol. 73, pp. 1334-1336, Aug. 1985.
L. A. Shepp and B. F. Logan, The Fourier reconstruction of a head W. E. Higgins and D. C. Munson, Jr., An algorithm for computing
section, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. NS-21, pp. 21-43, June 1974. general integer-order Hankel transforms, IEEE Trans. Acoust.,
R. M. Lewitt, R. H. T. Bates, and T . M. Peters, Image reconstruc- Speech, Signal Processing, vol. ASSP-35, pp. 86-97, Jan. 1987.
tion from projections 11: Modified back-projection methods, Optik, A. Papoulis, Systems and Transforms with Applications in Optics.
vol. 50, pp. 85-109, Mar. 1978. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968.
G. T. Herman, Ed., Image Reconstruction from Projections: The W. E. Higgins and D. C. Munson, Jr., private correspondence with
Fundamentals of Computerized Tomography. New York: Aca- A. Macovski, Aug. 1987.
demic, 1980. -, Tomographic image reconstruction via a Hankel transform ap-
A . Rosenfeld and A. C. Kak, Digital Picture Processing, Vol. I . preach," Coordinated Sci. Lab., Univ. Illinois, Urbana, Tech. Rep.,
New York: Academic, 1983. 1987.
R. N. Mersereau and A. V. Oppenheim, Digital reconstruction of A. V. Oppenheim and R. W. Shafer, Digital Signal Processing. En-
multidimensional signals from their projections, Proc. IEEE, vol. glewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1975.
62, pp. 1319-1338, Oct. 1974. H. Fan and J. L. C. Sanz, Comments on Direct Fourier reconstruc-
H. J. Scudder, Introduction to computer aided tomography, Proc. tion in computer tomography, IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Sig-
IEEE, vol. 66, pp. 628-637, June 1978. nal Processing, vol. ASSP-33, pp. 446-449, Apr. 1985.
72 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, VOL. I, NO. I , MARCH 1988
[38] C . F. R . Weiman and G. Chaikin, Logarithmic spiral grids for im- New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973.
age processing and display, Comput. Graphics Image Processing, [41] C. Lanczos, Discourse of Fourier Series. Edinburgh: Oliver and
vol. 11, pp. 197-226, NOV. 1979. Boyd. 1966.
1391 G. M. Chaikin and C. F. R. Weiman, Conformal computational [42] W.E. Higgins and D. C. Munson, Jr., Tomographic image recon-
geometry for machine vision, in Proc. 5th Int. Con5 Pattern Rec- struction via a Hankel-transform approach, presented at the 17th
ognition, Miami Beach, FL, Dec. 1980, pp. 1106-1 1 IO. Asilomar Conf. Circuits, Syst., Comput., Pacific Grove, CA, Oct.
[40] R. W. Hamming, Numerical Methods for Scientists and Engineers. 1983.