Locality estimates for Fresnel-wave-propagation and stability of X-ray phase contrast imaging with finite detectors
Simon Maretzke

TL;DR
This paper analyzes the stability of X-ray phase contrast imaging with finite detectors, revealing that while the problem is severely ill-posed, stable reconstruction is possible within a resolution limit determined by detector size and Fresnel number.
Contribution
It provides the first quantitative analysis of the locality and stability in Fresnel-wave-propagation with finite detectors, establishing resolution limits for stable image reconstruction.
Findings
Image reconstruction is severely ill-posed with finite detectors.
Lipschitz-stability holds within a resolution limit depending on detector size.
The smallest resolvable lengthscale is inversely proportional to the Fresnel number.
Abstract
Coherent wave-propagation in the near-field Fresnel-regime is the underlying contrast-mechanism to (propagation-based) X-ray phase contrast imaging (XPCI), an emerging lensless technique that enables 2D- and 3D-imaging of biological soft tissues and other light-element samples down to nanometer-resolutions. Mathematically, propagation is described by the Fresnel-propagator, a convolution with an arbitrarily non-local kernel. As real-world detectors may only capture a finite field-of-view, this non-locality implies that the recorded diffraction-patterns are necessarily incomplete. This raises the question of stability of image-reconstruction from the truncated data -- even if the complex-valued wave-field, and not just its modulus, could be measured. Contrary to the latter restriction of the acquisition, known as the phase-problem, the finite-detector-problem has not received much…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
