1
Set conditions
Keep cone geometry fixed and change the evaluation point to inspect candidate positions, weights and SSPz.Aperture and calculation method
The default transaxial aperture and channel spacing of 0.58 mm are approximate isocenter values derived from the geometry in CT and MRI (Corona Publishing). Aperture width equals channel spacing in this idealized setting; these are not scanner specifications.
2
Inspect the angular-longitudinal diagram and weights
Follow the acquired positions through to SSPz.
Paired comparison: left = no cone geometry (parallel reference); right = cone geometry included. Shared explanations appear above the pair; each panel has its own condition label.
All detector-row positions are shown. Solid lines: direct data; dashed lines: complementary data.
Details
The horizontal axis is the distance between a candidate detector-row center and the target plane; the vertical axis is the direct-side relative tube angle β. Solid lines show all N rows on the direct side, and dashed lines show all N rows on the complementary side paired with that angle. Complementary-side positions are plotted against the same reference-angle axis while retaining their longitudinal positions at acquisition; their acquisition times and table positions are not shifted to those of the direct view. Candidate searching retains all N rows in every acquired view and does not exclude candidates according to configured slice thickness T. The left column is a parallel-beam reference with a complementary-angle offset of 180° and a distance ratio of 1. The right column uses the fan-beam complementary angle for the ray through the evaluation point and the source-to-point distance at the acquisition angle. The two conditions coincide at isocenter. When the full-scan comparison is selected, only the solid direct-side trajectories are shown.
These diagrams are not restricted to a fixed central fan channel. The ray toward the selected transverse position is determined at each acquisition angle, so its position within the fan changes during rotation for an off-center evaluation point. The dashed complementary-side trajectories show the acquired views immediately before and after the ideal complementary angle βc=β+180°+2γ. Here, γ is the signed angle from the fan-center direction to the direction of the evaluation point. Lines connect the positions calculated at every acquired angle as visual guides; they do not represent additional measured data between acquired views. The discrete arrangement of in-plane detector channels is not reproduced.
For the right column, the distance ratio to a fixed evaluation point is defined as q(β) = L(β)/R = √{1 + (r/R)² − 2(r/R)cosβ} Here, R is the source-to-isocenter distance, r is the isocenter-to-point distance, β is the relative tube angle with 0° defined where the source is in the same radial direction as the evaluation point, and L(β) is the source-to-point distance at that angle. The distance ratio q increases from 0° to 180° and decreases from 180° to 360°. In contrast, the difference from the parallel-beam approximation, q − 1, changes sign within one rotation, so the magnitude of its effect decreases and then increases again. A candidate row center is calculated by adding the detector-row position scaled by q(β) to the linear longitudinal displacement from table motion. On the complementary side, the table position and distance ratio are evaluated at the actual complementary-data acquisition angle, not at β on the display axis. Consequently, the solid and dashed trajectories are not related by a simple 180° shift.
Display: all-row candidate trajectories (rotations containing selected endpoints) All-row candidates retained; no exclusion based on configured thickness TWith cone geometry
Details
Fan-beam complement + periodic distance scaling; all N rowsEnlarged view near the target plane. Circles and triangles mark selected candidates; shading indicates interpolation weights.
Details
Thin lines show the same all-row candidate trajectories as in 2A. Color identifies the detector row. A crossing does not transfer a color to a different row. Overlapping trajectories are shown by color blending. A blended color indicates overlap, not another detector row or a weight. Lines are made fainter for many-row displays. Circles denote selected direct-side candidates and triangles complementary-side candidates. A circle inside a triangle identifies an acquired sample assigned to both sides. Saturation represents total weight w after summing contributions from the two angular branches for the same acquired sample (the same acquired view and detector row). Different acquired samples are not summed merely because they occupy the same position. This shows local FW=0 interpolation at the central position, not all contributors to a thick-slice response. Filter interpolation reselects candidates at each position within FW, using acquired samples outside FW when needed for bracketing. Markers show selected angles; trajectories use every acquired angle.
Enlarged view around the target planeWithout cone geometry
Details
Parallel-beam 180° endpoints selected from all rowsWith cone geometry
Details
Fan-beam endpoints selected from all rowsDetails
β is the direct-side relative tube angle; complementary trajectories use the same reference angle. The no-cone reference uses γ=0, βc=β+180°, and q=1; the cone condition uses βc=β+180°+2γ and distance ratio q. All-row trajectories in 2A describe acquisition geometry. Endpoints in 2B and gaps in 2C audit local FW=0 interpolation at the central position, not all thick-slice contributors or a scanner-selected sample count. The same acquired sample may reappear in different angular correspondences, so lines and markers are not independent samples. Acquisition geometry is retained; this revision changes the SSPz response definition and filter interpolation.
Inspect complementary angles, acquisition order, and candidate selection in sequence. The following figures show different quantities.
Details
Pair direct and complementary rays in absolute acquisition orderDetails
For the direct ray at each acquired view β, the line joining the x-ray source and the evaluation point is extended to its second intersection with the source orbit. This defines the source angle βc of the complementary ray. Under the displayed sign convention, βc=β+180°+2γ. The first plot shows the ideal complementary angle and the immediately preceding and following acquired views that bracket it. Rather than only rounding to one nearest view, the calculation retains the angular residuals to both neighboring views and the angular interpolation fraction.
The second plot separately shows the two spans in absolute acquisition order: direct rayn to complementary rayn, and complementary rayn to direct rayn+1. The arrows indicate acquisition order, not longitudinal order. Within each span, all detector rows are searched for the minimum bracket around the target plane, allowing either family to provide the smaller-z endpoint. This display audits the geometry of both consecutive spans instead of assessing the 180°+2γ correspondence from only one candidate.
The third plot merges all detector-row candidates from the direct and complementary ray families into one set and selects the nearest two points on the smaller-z and larger-z sides of the target plane. The endpoints are retained jointly as one bracket rather than evaluated independently. If d− and d+ denote the distances to the smaller-z and larger-z candidates, respectively, the merged bracket width is Gmerge=d−+d+. A selected pair may be direct-direct, direct-complementary, complementary-direct, or complementary-complementary. Candidates tied at the same z-coordinate share the endpoint's total weight equally, and exact matches to the target plane are retained. In the primary 180LI analysis, this merging and longitudinal linear interpolation are performed separately for the lower and upper acquired views bracketing the ideal complementary angle, and the two branches are combined according to the angular position.
The complementary-ray family is not a separate acquisition; it is the same acquired projection data re-indexed through the 180LI angular relationship. Each absolute view has as many candidates as the entered number of detector rows. The plotted endpoints do not represent the total candidate count. When 180LI acquisition geometry is selected, the angular correspondence, neighboring acquired views, all-row candidate merging, longitudinal weights, and angular weights are applied to the explanatory SSPz. When the direct-ray 0-360° full scan is selected, Section 2C remains as a comparative acquisition-geometry audit and is not applied to SSPz. Scanner-specific detector-channel interpolation, redundancy weighting, cone-beam weighting, and backprojection are not reproduced.
Fan-beam complementary-ray angle
Details
βc−β = 180° + 2γTwo spans linked in absolute acquisition order
Details
Direct rayₙ→complementary rayₙ / complementary rayₙ→direct rayₙ₊₁Nearest bracketing pair after merging all candidates
Details
Acquisition-geometry reference for generalized two-point linear interpolation3
Inspect complete SSPz shapes and variation
Inspect tails, asymmetry, and the complete profile rather than width alone.
Details
Rectangular-weight filter interpolation follows Eq. (6) of Taguchi et al. The response is evaluated by moving the reconstruction plane past a fixed thin object. Configured thickness T defines rectangular averaging width FW. It is not calibrated to scanner nominal thickness; FWHM is measured from the calculated response.
Details
SSPz curves join adjacent calculated samples with straight segments, without spline interpolation, smoothing, or point decimation. Screen and 600 dpi exports use the same drawing method. Low-amplitude tails join samples at or above 1% in logarithmic coordinates.
All 360 SSPz profiles are overlaid. Each is peak-normalized, without alignment.
Details
The horizontal axis is reconstruction-plane position relative to a fixed thin object, zᵣ−zₒ. For each state the object is fixed, the reconstruction plane is scanned, and acquired candidates are reselected at every filter position. Each curve is peak-normalized without additional peak or centroid alignment. The displayed range is derived from the central shape at or above 10%; low-amplitude tails are shown separately.
360 object positions within one table feedDetails
Each thin line represents one of 360 equally spaced model states, with no state subsampling. No summary curve or filled envelope is superimposed, so the overlap among individual curves remains visible. These states do not represent 360 separate acquisitions or measured absolute tube angles.
Details
Geometric variation remaining after application of the configured thicknessWithout cone geometry
Details
Parallel-beam 180-degree reference; filter-interpolatedWith cone geometry
Details
Fan-beam condition; filter-interpolatedLogarithmic view of the cone-geometry SSPz tails down to 1%.
Details
The filter-interpolated SSPz curves with cone-geometry scaling from 3A are displayed with a logarithmic vertical axis. This separates broad low-amplitude tails, which may persist even when FWHM is nearly constant, from the central profile. Values below 1% are not drawn.
Log-scale display at or above 1%With cone geometry
Details
Fan-beam condition; low-amplitude tails3D geometry of multislice helical acquisition and candidates nearest the reconstruction plane
This not-to-scale schematic uses object-fixed coordinates. The left panel shows the relative helical focal-spot trajectory, selected reconstruction plane, and representative direct- and complementary-side rays. The right panel shows every detector-row-center position as a short tick and uses circles and triangles for candidates nearest the reconstruction plane. Candidate selection and weighting are not shown.
Details
Scope of this figure
This is a not-to-scale schematic in object-fixed coordinates. From the current inputs, it shows the table feed per rotation F=pNd, the selected reconstruction plane z0=zref+sF, the direct-side angle β, and the ideal complementary angle βc=β+180°+2γ.
- Direct side
- Thin lines show all row positions; circles mark candidates nearest the reconstruction plane
- Complementary side
- Thin lines show all row positions in the two acquired views bracketing the ideal complementary angle; triangles mark candidates nearest the reconstruction plane
- Ideal complementary angle
- Angular counterpart βc, drawn with a dashed encoding to distinguish it from acquired views
- Selected reconstruction plane z0
- The plane at which the geometry is examined for the current settings. s=0 is the reference plane, and s=1 is the next position one table feed F away
After computation, the geometry corresponding to the current inputs and inspected state is shown here.
Display boundary: Thin rays in the left panel show nine representative rows, and short ticks in the right panel show all N rows. Circles and triangles are positional guides for the candidates nearest the reconstruction plane; they do not indicate candidate selection, weighting, or a threshold based on configured thickness. Because detector-to-isocenter distance is not an input, the figure shows row-center positions on the longitudinal line through the evaluation point rather than a physical detector plane. The AAI weighting function h(z) of Schaller et al. is not applied.
Details
Details
For each direct-side view, the unweighted standard deviation of the longitudinal positions is calculated from all N rows in that view and all N rows in the acquired views bracketing the ideal complementary angle βc=β+180°+2γ. An acquired view that coincides with another is included only once. Candidate selection, interpolation or reconstruction weighting, and thresholds based on the configured slice thickness T are not applied. This curve shows the spread of candidate positions produced by the acquisition geometry; it is not the final SSPz.
Unweighted longitudinal standard deviation of all candidate detector-row centers
Details
Without versus with cone-geometry scalingDetails
Filter-interpolated SSPz onlySSPz for the selected state
Details
Horizontal range follows the SSPz region above 10%Compare FWHM, FWTM and other width metrics across all 360 states.
Details
FWHM, FWTM, and standard deviation are calculated from the filter-interpolated SSPz and divided by reference thickness T. T is neither a broadening operation nor a target FWHM. Distinguish effects of changing FW from changes in the ratio caused by T. Inspect tails and asymmetry as well as width metrics.
FWHM, FWTM, and standard deviation after inspection of the complete profileDetails
SSPz width variation within one table feed
Details
FWHM| Condition | FWHM (mm) | FWTM (mm) | σ (mm) | Maximum Gₑff/T (audit) |
|---|
Definitions: SSPz, longitudinal slice sensitivity profile; FWHM, full width at half maximum; FWTM, full width at tenth maximum; σ, standard deviation of the area-normalized SSPz. In the primary 180LI analysis, Gₑff/T is the angularly weighted bracket width of the two branches bracketing the ideal complementary angle, divided by the configured slice thickness. Displayed precision is for recording model output and does not represent measurement accuracy.
SSPz deviations from the mean
Each native FWHM midpoint is aligned to zero before subtracting the pointwise mean. Double-headed arrows show the mean of individual FWHMs. Intensity represents the fraction of states per bin (0–100%) using the same power of 0.35 as the manuscript figure.
Common grid: 0.01 mm; deviation bin width: 0.002. Widths are not rescaled; the vertical range expands to include all deviations. This view does not indicate agreement of mean shapes or measured start-angle probabilities.
Available after calculation.
4
Axial model scope
Implemented
- Primary analysis using 180LI acquisition geometry and comparator analysis using a direct-ray 0-360° full scan
- The 180LI complementary angle for each direct ray through the evaluation point, the immediately preceding and following acquired views, and the angular interpolation fraction
- The two spans in absolute acquisition order: direct rayₙ→complementary rayₙ and complementary rayₙ→direct rayₙ₊₁
- Merge all detector-row candidates from the direct and complementary ray families separately at the lower and upper acquired views bracketing the ideal complementary angle, then search for the nearest endpoints bracketing the target plane
- Longitudinal linear interpolation within each branch and linear angular combination of the two branches based on the ideal complementary angle
- Enumeration of detector-row candidates over multiple rotations
- Search for the two nearest candidates that bracket the target plane and assignment of linear interpolation weights
- Unweighted longitudinal standard deviation of candidate positions from all rows in the direct view and all rows in the acquired views bracketing the ideal complementary angle
- Comparison of acquisition geometries without candidate selection, interpolation weights, reconstruction weights, or thresholds based on configured slice thickness
- Unit-area rectangular detector-row response
- Taguchi et al., Eq. (6): local linear interpolation with candidate reselection at each longitudinal position, followed by a normalized rectangular-weight average
- Idealized scaling of candidate-row positions and row widths by variation in source-to-point distance
Not implemented
- Schaller et al.'s adaptive longitudinal interpolation algorithm
- Three-dimensional backprojection such as the Feldkamp method
- Projection selection and weighting specific to TCOT or MUSCOT
- Scanner-specific redundancy, cone-beam, or backprojection weighting
- Iterative reconstruction, deep-learning reconstruction, or noise
- Scanner-image temporal sensitivity and motion response (a separate HFI reference calculation follows)
Caution: This model applies the filter-interpolation construction in Eq. (6) and Figs. 5/6 of Taguchi et al. to idealized acquisition geometry and row apertures. FW, resampling count K, and reference slice thickness T are separate inputs. FW=T does not guarantee FWHM=T and is not calibrated to scanner nominal thickness. This is the response to a fixed thin object; finite bead diameter, complete image reconstruction, scanner-specific data selection and weights, and cone-beam backprojection are not reproduced. Endpoints and gaps in 2B/2C audit local FW=0 interpolation at the central position. Do not use for patient care, equipment performance guarantees, or quantitative prediction of commercial reconstruction.
5
Literature basis and implementation boundaries
Below each reference, we identify the calculations adopted and their scope.
Explore reconstruction positions and SSPz with a stationary table — Use the current row count, row width, focal spot and related settings to explore axial responses at reconstruction positions corresponding to the detector rows.
-
Wang G, Vannier MW. Spatial variation of section sensitivity profile in spiral computed tomography. Medical Physics. 1994;21:1491–1497.
Basis for geometric analysis of the spatial variation of the section sensitivity profile (SSP) with transaxial position. This website does not directly use the paper's 180° half-scan formulation.
-
Wang G, Madsen M, Redford K, Zhao S, Vannier MW. A study on the section sensitivity profile in multi-row-detector spiral CT. Journal of X-Ray Science and Technology. 2003;11:1–11.
Background for multirow angular-axial geometry and SSP analysis; not a reproduction of the complete published or commercial reconstruction.
-
Schaller S, Flohr T, Klingenbeck K, Krause J, Fuchs T, Kalender WA. Spiral interpolation algorithm for multislice spiral CT—Part I: Theory. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. 2000;19:822–834.
Background for axial interpolation and normalized weights. The adaptive axial interpolation in this paper is not implemented.
-
Kudo H, Rodet T, Noo F, Defrise M. Exact and approximate algorithms for helical cone-beam CT. Physics in Medicine and Biology. 2004;49:2913–2931.
Background on exact and approximate reconstruction. The current axial model computes neither FDK nor exact 3D reconstruction.
-
Taguchi K, Aradate H. Algorithm for image reconstruction in multi-slice helical CT. Medical Physics. 1998;25:550–561.
The weighted axial interpolation concept in Eq. (6) motivates rectangular T averaging. The current implementation integrates the piecewise-linear axial grid, unlike the former finite-K resampling scheme.
-
Hu H. Multi-slice helical CT: Scan and reconstruction. Medical Physics. 1999;26:5–18.
This study was consulted for the interlaced helical samples formed by the direct and complementary ray families and for generalized two-point linear interpolation using the two measurements nearest the target plane across all detector rows. This website displays that acquisition-geometry reference but does not reproduce scanner-specific redundancy handling or backprojection.
-
Zamyatin AA, Taguchi K, Silver MD. Helical cone beam CT with an asymmetrical detector. Medical Physics. 2005;32:3117–3127.
Reference for the transverse relationship between direct and opposite-direction source rays, including the fan-angle-dependent source separation. Opposite transverse directions need not have matching axial ray components. The missing-data recovery method is not implemented.
-
Hsieh J, Tang X, Thibault JB, Shaughnessy C, Nilsen RA, Williams E. Conjugate cone-beam reconstruction algorithm. Optical Engineering. 2007;46(6):067001.
Uses rowwise rebinning and RRI (row-to-row interpolation) linear row weights. Acquired-row edge normalization and rectangular averaging are explicit additional definitions. The axial response excludes filtered backprojection and does not reproduce the published reconstructed image.
-
Tang X, Hsieh J, Nilsen RA, McOlash SM. Extending three-dimensional weighted cone beam filtered backprojection (CB-FBP) algorithm for image reconstruction in volumetric CT at low helical pitches. International Journal of Biomedical Imaging. 2006;2006:45942.
Reference for preprocessing in the archived FBP implementation. The current axial model omits the transaxial ramp and FBP geometric weights.
-
Toki Y. Computerized tomographic imaging method and apparatus utilizing data interpolation for helical scanning. EP0450152B1.
Figures 4–6 describe direct/opposing interpolation with one full fan opening on either side of a central turn. This model declares finite source support of 360° + 2Φ, with Φ the full fan opening. Its use for the multirow model is an explicit assumption.
Axial model details
6
Reporting errors and corrections
This website provides a public reference model for research and education. If you identify an error in an equation, geometry, terminology, implementation, or figure, please let us know. Critical review by specialists is welcome.
To help us reproduce and evaluate the report, please include the following information when possible.
- The affected page element, figure, equation, or term
- The URL saved with “Copy URL for these settings” and, when helpful, a screenshot
- The expected behavior and the result that was displayed
Details
Correction policy: We will review each report and, when an error is confirmed, correct the website and describe the update. Public availability does not guarantee that the model is complete or error-free.