Matter and Radiation at Extremes, Volume. 9, Issue 2, 027801(2024)

Five-view three-dimensional reconstruction for ultrafast dynamic imaging of pulsed radiation sources

Jianpeng Gao1,2、*, Liang Sheng2, Xinyi Wang2, Yanhong Zhang2, Liang Li1, Baojun Duan2, Mei Zhang2, Yang Li2, and Dongwei Hei2
Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Engineering Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
  • 2National Key Laboratory of Intense Pulsed Radiation Simulation and Effect, Northwest Institute of Nuclear Technology, Xi’an 710024, China
  • show less
    Figures & Tables(14)
    Structure of neural network.
    The angular distribution of the imaging axes: 1, (90°,180°); 2, (90°,135°); 3, (90°,90°); 4, (90°,45°); 5, (90°,22.5°).
    3D reconstructed results of three different algorithms. (a1)–(a3) Perspective view, 3D view and slice image at x = 0 of simulated data, respectively. (b1)–(b3) Results of analytical method. (c1)–(c3) Results of iterative method. (d1)–(d3) Results of DIP processing.
    3D reconstructed results of three different algorithms with noisy data. (a1)–(a3) Perspective view, 3D view, and slice image at x = 0 of analytical results, respectively. (b1)–(b3) Results of iterative method. (c1)–(c3) Results of DIP processing.
    Comparison between projections of reconstruction results and simulation data projections. (a1) Projection of simulation data at angle 1. (a2) Projection with noise. (b1) and (b2) Difference images between simulation data projection and projection of analytical results with and without noisy data. (c1) and (c2) Difference projection images of iterative results with and without noisy data. (d1) and (d2) Difference projection images of iteration with DIP results with and without noisy data.
    Convergence curve of iterative process (a) and loss curve of DIP (b) with and without noisy data.
    Schematic of XUV/SR pinhole imaging system.6
    (a) Raw projection data and (b)–(e) preprocessed images of angle 1 from shot 2 023 052 405.
    3D spatial distributions of XUV/SR emission reconstructed by analytical method. (a1)–(a4) Reconstructed 3D images from shot 2 023 052 405 at T1, …, T4, respectively. (b1)–(b4) Perspective images from shot 2 023 052 405 at T1, …, T4, respectively. (c1)–(c4) Reconstructed 3D images from shot 2 023 052 406 at T1, …, T4, respectively. (d1)–(d4) Perspective images from shot 2 023 052 406 at T1, …, T4, respectively.
    3D spatial distributions of XUV/SR emission reconstructed by the iterative method with DIP. (a1)–(a4) Reconstructed 3D images from shot 2 023 052 405 at T1, …, T4, respectively. (b1)–(b4) Perspective images from shot 2 023 052 405 at T1, …, T4, respectively. (c1)–(c4) Reconstructed 3D images from shot 2 023 052 406 at T1, …, T4, respectively. (d1)–(d4) Perspective images from shot 2 023 052 406 at T1, …, T4, respectively.
    Slice images of XUV/SR emission reconstructed by the iterative method with DIP. (a1)–(a4) XUV/SR emission slice images at z = −47 from shot 2 023 052 405 at T1, …, T4, respectively. (b1)–(b4) XUV/SR emission slice images at z = 113 from shot 2 023 052 405 at T1, …, T4, respectively.
    • Table 1. Iterative method using cylindrical harmonic decomposition.

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 1. Iterative method using cylindrical harmonic decomposition.

      Parameters: M, maximum expansion order; K, iteration number; ɛ, difference between the projection images of the results in two adjacent iterations; λ, μ0, d0, b0, parameters of ADMM algorithm; γ, η, adaptive updating parameters.

      1: Calculate sm by analytical algorithm, t ← 0, s(0)sm.

      2: Compute S0r, Irec0Pp̂S0.

      3: for k = 1, …, K do

      4: tt + 1

      5: for nz = 1: Nz do

      6: Obtain s(t) by L-BFGS algorithm.

      7: Compute S(t)z, set S(t)zj=0 if S(t)zj<0.

      8: dtshrinkφst+bt1,1μt1

      9: btbt1+φstdt

      10: Update μt

      11: end for

      12: if 1NxNyIrectIrec2t12ε, break;

      13: end for

    • Table 1. Image assessment indices of sources reconstructed by the analytical method (AM), the iterative method (IM), and iteration with DIP (IM+DIP). Boldface denotes that the image assessment index of corresponding algorithm is better than that of other algorithms.

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 1. Image assessment indices of sources reconstructed by the analytical method (AM), the iterative method (IM), and iteration with DIP (IM+DIP). Boldface denotes that the image assessment index of corresponding algorithm is better than that of other algorithms.

      AlgorithmSSIMPSNRRMSE(S)RMSE(I)
      Without noiseAM0.811 1527.5960.041 717.7679
      IM0.955 8739.8720.010 151.0324
      IM+DIP0.9794942.4540.007540.2957
      With noiseAM0.750 0226.9710.044 828.1900
      IM0.828 4332.3650.024 092.3296
      IM+DIP0.9552139.6070.010460.5068
    • Table 2. Artifact reduction via deep image prior.

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 2. Artifact reduction via deep image prior.

      Parameters: σ, standard deviation of Gaussian noise; Ke, epochs;

      lr, learning rate

      1 ηU(0, 0.1):

      2: for t = 1, …, Ke do

      3: ξN(0, σ) ηη + ξ,

      4: calculate loss Lt

      5: update Θ using Adam

      6: end for

      7: SfΘη

    Tools

    Get Citation

    Copy Citation Text

    Jianpeng Gao, Liang Sheng, Xinyi Wang, Yanhong Zhang, Liang Li, Baojun Duan, Mei Zhang, Yang Li, Dongwei Hei. Five-view three-dimensional reconstruction for ultrafast dynamic imaging of pulsed radiation sources[J]. Matter and Radiation at Extremes, 2024, 9(2): 027801

    Download Citation

    EndNote(RIS)BibTexPlain Text
    Save article for my favorites
    Paper Information

    Category:

    Received: Sep. 21, 2023

    Accepted: Nov. 30, 2023

    Published Online: Apr. 15, 2024

    The Author Email:

    DOI:10.1063/5.0177342

    Topics