Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 148, Issue 1, pp 117–132 | Cite as

A method for reconstructing label images from a few projections, as motivated by electron microscopy

  • Hstau Y. Liao
  • Gabor T. Herman


Our aim is to produce a tessellation of space into small voxels and, based on only a few tomographic projections of an object, assign to each voxel a label that indicates one of the components of interest constituting the object. Traditional methods are not reliable in applications, such as electron microscopy in which (due to the damage by radiation) only a few projections are available. We postulate a low level prior knowledge regarding the underlying distribution of label images, and then directly estimate the label image based on the prior and the projections. We use a relatively efficient approximation to a global search for the optimal estimate.


Electron tomography Electron microscopy Gibbs distribution Few projections Global optimization Simulated annealing 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Besag, J. (1977). “Efficiency of Pseudo-Likelihood Estimation for Simple Gaussian Fields.” Biometrika, 64, 616–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Besag, J. (1986). “On the Statistical Analysis of Dirty Pictures.” J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B, 48, 259–302.Google Scholar
  3. Carazo, J., C. Sorzano, E. Rietzel, R. Schröder, and R. Marabini. (1999). “Discrete Tomography in Electron Microscopy.” In G. Herman and A. Kuba (Eds.). Discrete Tomography: Foundations, Algorithms and Applications, pp. 405–416, Birkhäuser, Boston.Google Scholar
  4. Carvalho, B., G. Herman, S. Matej, C. Salzberg, and E. Vardi. (1999). “Binary Tomography for Triplane Cardiography.” In A. Kuba, M. Sámal and A. Todd-Pokropek (Eds.). Information Processing in Medical Imaging, pp. 29–41, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Frank, J. (1996). Three-Dimensional Electron Microscopy of Macromolecular Assemblies: Visualization of Biological Molecules in Their Native States. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Geman, S. and D. Geman. (1984). “Stochastic Relaxation, Gibbs Distributions, and the Bayesian Restoration of Images.” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 6, 721–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hastings, W. (1970). “Monte Carlo Sampling Methods using Markov Chains and their Applications.” Biometrika, 57, 97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Herman, G. (1980). Image Reconstruction from Projections: The Fundamentals of Computerized Tomography, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Herman, G. and A. Kuba (Eds.) (1999). Discrete Tomography: Foundations, Algorithms and Applications. Birkhäuser, Boston.Google Scholar
  10. Higdon, D. (1998). “Auxuliary Variable Methods for Markov Chain Monte Carlo with Applications.” J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 93, 585–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Liao, H. and G. Herman. (2003). “Tomographic Reconstruction of Label Images from a Few Projections.” Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics, 9th International Workshop Combinatorial Image Analysis 12,–ng/31/29/24/71/23/show/Products/notes/index.htt.
  12. Liao, H. and G. Herman. (2004). “Automated Estimation of the Parameters of Gibbs Priors to be used in Binary Tomography.” Discrete Appl. Math., 139, 149–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Metropolis, N., A. Rosenbluth, M. Rosenbluth, A. Teller, and E. Teller. (1953). “Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines.” J. Chem. Phys., 21, 1087–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Morris, R. (1997). “Auxiliary Variables for Markov Random Fields with Higher Order Interactions.” In E. Hancock and M. Pelillo (Eds.), Proc. EMMCVPR’99, Vol. 1654 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 131–141, Springer-Verlag, York, UK.Google Scholar
  15. Sahoo, P., S. Soltani, A. Wong, and Y. Chen. (1996). “A Survey of Thresholding Techniques.” Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, 41, 233–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Swendsen, R. and J.-S. Wang. (1987). “Nonuniversal Critical Dynamics in Monte Carlo Simulation.” Phys. Rev. Lett., 58, 86–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Tjelmeland, H. and J. Besag. (1998). “Markov Random Fields with Higher-Order Interactions.” Scand. J. Statist., 25, 415–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vardi, E., G. Herman, and T. Kong. (2001). “Speeding up Stochastic Reconstructions of Binary Images from Limited Projection Directions.” Linear Algebra Appl., 339, 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Winkler, G. (2003). Image Analysis, Random Fields and Dynamic Monte Carlo Methods, 2nd edn., Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Mathematics and Its ApplicationsUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceDiscrete Imaging and Graphics Group Graduate Center, CUNYNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations