[Rtk-users] Model-based image reconstruction based on the RTK modules

[vahid ettehadi]

OK. good. Thank Cyril to clarify it to me.  To implement the Newton's methods instead of multiplication of R with R^T, we need the multiplication of Jacobian/Sensitivity (R here) matrix with vector variable (here x) and the gradient vector (here multiplication of R with -r). I think it is possible to implement the Newton optimization methods with the current modules as I think we could extract the R and f dot product and R and r dot product. Am I right?About the displayed algorithms, I think the gradient vector is dot product of matrix A (Jacobian) with the minus residual vector (-r).  
One more question:I already developed my codes in python. Do you think it is easy to wrap your modules in python? I don't have experience in these subject.
Regards,Vahid 

    On Thursday, November 3, 2016 2:23 AM, Cyril Mory <cyril.mory at creatis.insa-lyon.fr> wrote:
 

  Hello Vahid, Thank you for this insight on Newton's methods. Yes, the output of the backprojection filter, in SART, is the gradient of the cost function. You may have noticed that the pipeline performs a division of the forward projection by something coming from "RayBoxIntersectionFilter". This is to normalize the forward projection, so that R^T R f ~= blurry f. If you don't do it, you'll have R^T R f ~= alpha * blurry f, with alpha that can reach 200 or so, and your algorithm will quickly diverge.
   You could try to extract the gradient from the conjugate gradient filter as well, but it is significantly more tricky: first, the CG filter was implemented from the following algorithm, taken from wikipedia (which embeds the normalization I was mentioning earlier):  In this algorithm, it is not clear to me what exactly is the gradient of the cost function. I would say it is something like "- r_k", but I'm not sure. Second, as you see, the CG filter needs an operator A, which may differ from one problem to another, so this operator is implemented in a separate filter, which in your case would be rtkReconstructionConjugateGradientOperator, with the laplacian regularization parameter gamma set to 0. 
  Note that we never actually store the system matrix R. Instead, the interpolation coefficient it contains are re-computed on the fly everytime we forward project. And the same holds for backprojection, i.e the matrix R^T. Best, Cyril
  
 On 11/03/2016 03:38 AM, vahid ettehadi wrote:
  
  Hello Simon and Cyril, Thanks for the reply. You are right Simon. I did not notice it too in the literature. The main problem as you said is the storage. Actually I developed  the conjugate gradient (CG), quasi-Newton and Newton optimization methods for optical tomography and I intended to apply them to the CT reconstruction as well. I implemented the Newton's methods (Gauss-Newton and Levenberg-Marquardt) in a Jacobian-Free-Newton-Krylov approaches to avoid the matrix multiplication of Jacobians (sensitivity). It means we only need to store the Jacobian matrix for the these methods (the matrix R that Cyril was mentioned), that is still a big matrix for practical problems in CT reconstruction. For the quasi-Newton I adapted an L-BFGS algorithm that only need the 3 or 8 last iterations of the gradient vector to calculate the Hessian matrix. In my case, the L-BFGS and Newton's methods was much faster than the CG as you know because of using the second order derivative (hessian matrix). I saw in your last paper you implement the conjugate gradient method, so I  thought it might be easy to extract the gradient vector from CG modules and solve the cost function within the quasi-Newton/Newton methods. I will look at the codes to see what I can do. Thanks again for the reply. 
  @Cyril: Please correct me if I am wrong. you mean the output of backProjectionFilter is the gradient of defined cost function? 
  Regards, Vahid 
 
      On Wednesday, November 2, 2016 2:53 AM, Cyril Mory <cyril.mory at creatis.insa-lyon.fr> wrote:
  
 
    Hi Vahid, Welcome to RTK :) Indeed, there are several iterative methods already implemented in RTK, but none of the filters allows you to easily extract the gradient of the least squares function there are minimizing. 
 If you need to minimize the classical non-regularized tomographic cost function, ie || R f - p ||², with R the forward projection operator, f the volume you are looking for, and p the measured projections, my best advice would be to copy some  part of the pipeline of rtkSARTConeBeamReconstructionFilter to get the job done, ie the following part (copy-paste this into  webgraphviz.com)
 
 digraph SARTConeBeamReconstructionFilter {
 
 Input0 [ label="Input 0 (Volume)"];
 Input0 [shape=Mdiamond];
 Input1 [label="Input 1 (Projections)"];
 Input1 [shape=Mdiamond];
 
 node [shape=box];
 ForwardProject [ label="rtk::ForwardProjectionImageFilter" URL="\ref rtk::ForwardProjectionImageFilter"];
 Extract [ label="itk::ExtractImageFilter" URL="\ref itk::ExtractImageFilter"];
 MultiplyByZero [ label="itk::MultiplyImageFilter (by zero)" URL="\ref itk::MultiplyImageFilter"];
 AfterExtract [label="", fixedsize="false", width=0, height=0, shape=none];
 Subtract [ label="itk::SubtractImageFilter" URL="\ref itk::SubtractImageFilter"];
 MultiplyByLambda [ label="itk::MultiplyImageFilter (by lambda)" URL="\ref itk::MultiplyImageFilter"];
 Divide [ label="itk::DivideOrZeroOutImageFilter" URL="\ref itk::DivideOrZeroOutImageFilter"];
 GatingWeight [ label="itk::MultiplyImageFilter (by gating weight)" URL="\ref itk::MultiplyImageFilter", style=dashed];
 Displaced [ label="rtk::DisplacedDetectorImageFilter" URL="\ref rtk::DisplacedDetectorImageFilter"];
 ConstantProjectionStack [ label="rtk::ConstantImageSource" URL="\ref rtk::ConstantImageSource"];
 ExtractConstantProjection [ label="itk::ExtractImageFilter" URL="\ref itk::ExtractImageFilter"];
 RayBox [ label="rtk::RayBoxIntersectionImageFilter" URL="\ref rtk::RayBoxIntersectionImageFilter"];
 ConstantVolume [ label="rtk::ConstantImageSource" URL="\ref rtk::ConstantImageSource"];
 BackProjection [ label="rtk::BackProjectionImageFilter" URL="\ref rtk::BackProjectionImageFilter"];
 OutofInput0 [label="", fixedsize="false", width=0, height=0, shape=none];
 OutofBP [label="", fixedsize="false", width=0, height=0, shape=none];
 BeforeBP [label="", fixedsize="false", width=0, height=0, shape=none];
 BeforeAdd [label="", fixedsize="false", width=0, height=0, shape=none];
 Input0 -> OutofInput0 [arrowhead=none];
 OutofInput0 -> ForwardProject;
 ConstantVolume -> BeforeBP [arrowhead=none];
 BeforeBP -> BackProjection;
 Extract -> AfterExtract[arrowhead=none];
 AfterExtract -> MultiplyByZero;
 AfterExtract -> Subtract;
 MultiplyByZero -> ForwardProject;
 Input1 -> Extract;
 ForwardProject -> Subtract;
 Subtract -> MultiplyByLambda;
 MultiplyByLambda -> Divide;
 Divide -> GatingWeight;
 GatingWeight -> Displaced;
 ConstantProjectionStack -> ExtractConstantProjection;
 ExtractConstantProjection -> RayBox;
 RayBox -> Divide;
 Displaced -> BackProjection;
 BackProjection -> OutofBP [arrowhead=none];
 }
 
 As you can see, it is a very large part of the SART reconstruction filter, so yoiu might be better off just copying the whole SARTConeBeamReconstructionFilter and modifying it. 
 
 Of course, you could also look into ITK's cost function class, and see if one of the classes inherited from it suits your needs, implement your cost function this way, and use ITK's off-the-shelf solvers to minimize it. See the inheritance diagram  in https://itk.org/Doxygen/html/classitk_1_1CostFunctionTemplate.html if you want to try this approach.
 
 Best regards,
 Cyril
 
  On 11/01/2016 05:50 PM, vahid ettehadi via Rtk-users wrote:
  
  Hello RTK users and developers, 
  I already implemented the RTK and reconstructed some images with the FDK algorithm implemented in RTK. It works well. Thanks to RTK developers.
  Now, I am trying to develop a model-based image reconstruction for our cone-beam micro-CT. I see already that some iterative algorithms like ART and its modifications and conjugate-gradient (CG) method are  implemented in the RTK. I want to develop a model-based reconstruction through the Newton/quasi-Newton optimizations methods. I was wondering is it possible to extract the gradient of least square function from  implemented algorithms like CG module? Any recommendation will be appreciated.  
  Best Regards, Vahid 
   
  
 _______________________________________________
Rtk-users mailing list
Rtk-users at public.kitware.com
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/rtk-users
 
  
   
 _______________________________________________
 Rtk-users mailing list
 Rtk-users at public.kitware.com
 http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/rtk-users
  
 
      
 
 
_______________________________________________
Rtk-users mailing list
Rtk-users at public.kitware.com
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/rtk-users


   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/rtk-users/attachments/20161103/6852338b/attachment-0010.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: e300dfefdbd374cdee765397528a65a5736a50d3
Type: image/svg+xml
Size: 29828 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/rtk-users/attachments/20161103/6852338b/attachment-0010.svg>