New formulation optimizes data acquisition for binary tasks, indicating potential in spectral applications.
We propose a new formulation for ideal observers (IOs) that incorporate stochastic object models (SOMs) for data acquisition optimization. Approach: A data acquisition system is considered as a (possibly nonlinear) discrete-to-discrete mapping from a finite-dimensional object space, x∈R^(n_d), to a finite-dimensional measurement space, y∈R^m. For binary tasks, the two underlying SOMs, H_0 and H_1, are specified by two probability density functions (PDFs) p_0 (x), p_1 (x). This leads to the notion of intrinsic likelihood ratio (LR) Λ_I (x)=p_1 (x)/p_0 (x) and intrinsic class separability (ICS), the latter quantifies the population separability that is independent of data acquisition. With respect to ICS, the IO employs the "extrinsic" LR Λ(y)=pr (y|H_1)/pr(y|H_0) of the data and quantifies the extrinsic class separability (ECS). The difference between ICS and ECS measures the efficiency of data acquisition. We show that the extrinsic LR Λ(y) is the expectation of the intrinsic LR Λ_I (x), where the expectation is with respect to the posterior PDF pr(x│y,H_0 ) under H_0. Main results: We use two examples, one to clarify the new IO and the second to demonstrate its potential for real world applications. Specifically, we apply the new IO to spectral optimization in dual-energy CT projection domain material decomposition (pMD), for which SOMs are used to describe variability of basis material line integrals. The performance rank orders obtained by IO agree with physics predictions. Significance: The main computation in the new IO involves sampling from the posterior PDF pr(x│y,H_0 ), which are similar to (fully) Bayesian reconstruction. Thus our IO computation is amenable to standard techniques already familiar to CT researchers. The example of dual-energy pMD serves as a prototype for other spectral optimization problems, e.g., for photon counting CT or multi-energy CT with multi-layer detectors. .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: