Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision

, Volume 49, Issue 3, pp 569–582 | Cite as

Reconstruction of hv-Convex Sets by Their Coordinate X-Ray Functions

  • Ábris NagyEmail author
  • Csaba Vincze


Gardner and Kiderlen (Adv. Math. 214:323–343, 2007) presented an algorithm for reconstructing convex bodies from noisy X-ray measurements with a full proof of convergence in 2007. We would like to present some new steps into the direction of reconstructing not necessarily convex bodies by the help of the continuity properties of so-called generalized conic functions. Such a function measures the average taxicab distance of the points from a given compact set \(K\subset \mathbb {R}^{N}\) by integration. The basic result (Vincze and Nagy in J. Approx. Theory 164:371–390, 2012) is that the generalized conic function associated to a compact planar set determines the coordinate X-rays and vice versa. Vincze and Nagy (Submitted to Aequationes Math., 2014) proved continuity properties of the mapping which sends connected compact hv-convex sets having the same axis parallel bounding box to the associated generalized conic functions. We use these results to present an algorithm for the reconstruction of compact connected hv-convex planar bodies given by their coordinate X-rays. The basic method is varied with the quota system scheme. Greedy and anti-greedy versions are also presented with examples.


Parallel X-ray Generalized conic Geometric tomography Linear integer programming 



Ábris Nagy has been supported, in part, by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the European Union and the State of Hungary, co-financed by the European Social Fund in the framework of TÁMOP 4.2.4. A/2-11-1-2012-0001 ‘National Excellence Program’.

Csaba Vincze was partially supported by the European Union and the European Social Fund through the project Supercomputer, the national virtual lab (grant No.: TÁMOP-4.2.2.C-11/1/KONV-2012-0010).

This work is supported by the University of Debrecen’s internal research project RH/885/2013.


  1. 1.
    Alpers, A., Gardner, R.J., König, S., Pennington, R.S., Boothroyd, C.B., Houben, L., Dunin-Borkowski, R.E., Batenburg, K.J.: Geometric reconstruction methods for electron tomography. Ultramicroscopy 128, 42–54 (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balázs, P.: A benchmark set for the reconstruction of hv-convex discrete sets. Discrete Appl. Math. 157, 3447–3456 (2009) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balogh, E., Kuba, A., Dévényi, C., Del Lungo, A., Pinzani, R.: Comparison of algorithms for reconstructing hv-convex discrete sets. Linear Algebra Appl. 339, 23–35 (2001) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barcucci, E., Del Lungo, A., Nivat, M., Pinzani, R.: Reconstructing convex polyominoes from horizontal and vertical projections. Theor. Comput. Sci. 155, 321–347 (1996) CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Batenburg, K.J., Sijbers, J.: DART: a practical reconstruction algorithm for discrete tomography. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 20(9), 2542–2553 (2011) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brunetti, S., Daurat, A.: An algorithm reconstructing lattice convex sets. Theor. Comput. Sci. 304, 35–57 (2003) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brunetti, S., Daurat, A.: Determination of Q-convex bodies by X-rays. Electron. Notes Discrete Math. 20, 67–81 (2005) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brunetti, S., Daurat, A.: Stability in discrete tomography: some positive results. Discrete Appl. Math. 147, 207–226 (2005) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brunetti, S., Dulio, P., Peri, C.: Discrete tomography determination of bounded lattice sets from four X-rays. Discrete Appl. Math. 161(15), 2281–2292 (2013) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dulio, P.: Convex decomposition of U-polygons. Theor. Comput. Sci. 406/1-2, 80–89 (2008) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dulio, P., Gardner, R.J., Peri, C.: Discrete point X-rays. SIAM J. Discrete Math. 20(1), 171–188 (2006) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dulio, P., Peri, C.: On the geometric structure of lattice U-polygons. Discrete Math. 307/19-20, 2330–2340 (2007) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fishburn, P.C., Shepp, L.A.: Sets of uniqueness and additivity in integer lattices. In: Herman, G.T., Kuba, A. (eds.) Discrete Tomography: Foundations, Algorithms and Applications, pp. 35–58. Birkhäuser, Boston (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gardner, R.J.: Geometric Tomography, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York (1995). 2006 zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gardner, R.J., Gritzmann, P.: Discrete tomography: determination of finite sets by X-rays. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 349, 2271–2295 (1997) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gardner, R.J., Gritzmann, P.: Uniqueness and complexity in discrete tomography. In: Herman, G.T., Kuba, A. (eds.) Discrete Tomography: Foundations, Algorithms and Applications, pp. 85–113. Birkhäuser, Boston (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gardner, R.J., Kiderlen, M.: A solution to Hammer’s X-ray reconstruction problem. Adv. Math. 214, 323–343 (2007) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gardner, R.J., McMullen, P.: On Hammer’s X-ray problem. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 21(2), 171–175 (1980) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gritzmann, P., Langfeld, B., Wiegelmann, M.: Uniqueness in discrete tomography: three remarks and a corollary. SIAM J. Discrete Math. 25, 1589–1599 (2011) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hajdu, L.: Unique reconstruction of bounded sets in discrete tomography. Electron. Notes Discrete Math. 20, 15–25 (2005) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Haque, M.A., Ahmad, M.O., Swamy, M.N.S., Hasan, M.K., Lee, S.Y.: Adaptive projection selection for computed tomography. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 22(12), 5085–5095 (2013) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Herman, G.T.: Reconstruction of binary patterns from a few projections. In: Günther, A., Levrat, B., Lipps, H. (eds.) International Computing Symposium 1973, pp. 371–378. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1974) Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Herman, G.T.: Fundamentals of Computerized Tomography: Image Reconstruction from Projections. Springer, London (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Huck, C., Spieß, M.: Solution of a uniqueness problem in the discrete tomography of algebraic Delone sets. J. Reine Angew. Math. 677, 199–224 (2013) zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kak, A.C., Slaney, M.: Principles of Computerized Tomographic Imaging. SIAM, Philadelphia (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kölzow, D., Kuba, A., Volčič, A.: An algorithm for reconstructing convex bodies from their projections. Discrete Comput. Geom. 4, 205–237 (1989) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li, D., Sun, X.: Nonlinear Integer Programming. Springer, New-York (2006) zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vincze, C., Nagy, Á.: On the theory of generalized conics with applications in geometric tomography. J. Approx. Theory 164, 371–390 (2012) CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vincze, C., Nagy, Á.: Generalized conic functions of hv-convex planar sets: continuity properties and relations to X-rays. Submitted Aequationes Math.. arXiv:1303.4412
  30. 30.
    Volčič, A.: A three-point solution to Hammer’s X-ray problem. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 34, 349–359 (1986) zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yu, Z., Thibault, J.B., Bouman, C.A., Sauer, K.D., Hsieh, J.: Fast model-based X-ray CT reconstruction using spatially nonhomogeneous ICD optimization. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 20(1), 161–175 (2011) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhang, J., Wang, J., Zuo, H., Xu, G., Thibault, J.B.: Compressed sensing algorithms for fan-beam computed tomography image reconstruction. Opt. Eng. 51(7), 071402 (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Mathematics, MTA-DE Research Group “Equations Functions and Curves”Hungarian Academy of Sciences and University of DebrecenDebrecenHungary
  2. 2.Institute of MathematicsUniversity of DebrecenDebrecenHungary

Personalised recommendations