Published January 2008 | Version v1
Journal article

A comparison of alternating minimization and expectation maximization algorithms for single source gamma ray tomography

  • 1. Chemical Reaction Engineering Laboratory, Department of Energy, Environment and Chemical Engineering, Campus Box 1198, 1 Brookings Drive, Washington University, St Louis, MO 63130 (United States)
  • 2. Harper International Corporation, West Drullard Avenue, Lancaster, NY 14086 (United States)
  • 3. Electronic Systems and Signals Research Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Systems Engineering, 1 Brookings Drive, Washington University, St Louis, MO 63130-4899 (United States)

Description

Lange and Carson (1984 J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 8 306–16) defined image reconstruction for transmission tomography as a maximum likelihood estimation problem and derived an expectation maximization (EM) algorithm to obtain the maximum likelihood image estimate. However, in the maximization step or M-step of the EM algorithm, an approximation is made in the solution which can affect the image quality, particularly in the case of domains with high attenuating material. O'Sullivan and Benac (2007 IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 26 283–97) reformulated the maximum likelihood problem as a double minimization of an I-divergence to obtain a family of image reconstruction algorithms, called the alternating minimization (AM) algorithm. The AM algorithm increases the log-likelihood function while minimizing the I-divergence. In this work, we implement the AM algorithm for image reconstruction in gamma ray tomography for industrial applications. Experimental gamma ray transmission data obtained with a fan beam geometry gamma ray scanner, and simulated transmission data based on a synthetic phantom, with two phases (water and air) were considered in this study. Image reconstruction was carried out with these data using the AM and the EM algorithms to determine and quantitatively compare the holdup distribution images of the two phases in the phantoms. When compared to the EM algorithm, the AM algorithm shows qualitative and quantitative improvement in the holdup distribution images of the two phases for both the experimental and the simulated gamma ray transmission data

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/19/1/015506

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1088/0957-0233/19/1/015506;
PII
S0957-0233(08)45370-5;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Measurement Science and Technology
Journal Volume
19
Journal Issue
1
Journal Page Range
[14 p.]
ISSN
0957-0233
CODEN
MSTCEP