Response to "Feasibility of 3D reconstruction from a single 2D diffraction measurement"

TL;DR

This paper responds to critiques of ankylography, clarifying misunderstandings and defending its validity against flawed theoretical analysis and misrepresentations.

Contribution

It provides a detailed rebuttal to criticisms of ankylography, clarifying misconceptions and reaffirming its feasibility and validity.

Findings

Critiques of ankylography are based on flawed analysis.

The authors clarify the oversampling scheme in ankylography.

The response defends the validity of ankylography's reconstruction algorithm.

Abstract

We present our response to Pierre Thibault's article, titled "Feasibility of 3D reconstruction from a single 2D diffraction measurement" [1], in which he commented upon our recent ankylography paper [2]. While we appreciate Thibault's efforts in promoting further reflection on our paper, we found serious errors both in his understanding and analysis of ankylography: he inaccurately presented the oversampling scheme in ankylography, incorrectly described our reconstruction algorithm and our experiment, and formulated arguments based upon a flawed and overly-restrictive theoretical analysis. Therefore, we conclude that his main claims are either scientifically invalid or a misrepresentation of our claims about ankylography. Below is our detailed point-by-point response to his criticisms.