174 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, VOL. MI-6, NO.

2, JUNE 1987

Correspondence
On the Convergence of the Iterative Image Space With the preceding notation the sequence generated by ISRA is
Reconstruction Algorithm for Volume ECT defined for a given starting point x(0) > 0, j = 1, * , n, as
ALVARO R. DE PIERRO x(k+l)
i
- X(k)
A
i (a',
b)
(a1, AX(k) ) for] -= 1, -, n (3)
with a i the columns of the matrix A = { aij } and b the measurement
Abstract-The image space reconstruction algorithm (ISRA) is a spe- vector. In the terminology of [6], ( a i, b ) / ( a j, Ax (k) > is the er-
cial purpose method suitable for volume emission computed tomogra- ror image determined by back-projecting the data and the projec-
phy (ECT). In this correspondence we prove that the sequence gener- tions and computing the ratio of these back-projected images.
ated by ISRA always converges for any strictly positive starting point In a more general way, (3) can be presented as
to a nonnegative least-squares solution. Some suggestions are given in
order to improve the algorithm's performance. x5k+l) x(k) qj for] = 1,
i
-
xj ~(m1, x(k) ) fri=1 (4)
I. INTRODUCTION where q = (ql, q2, * *, qn ) Tis a positive vector and mj is the jth
Recently [6], a new iterative algorithm, called the image space row of a nonnegative matrix M. In our application q = ATb and M
reconstruction algorithm (ISRA) has been proposed in order to re- = ATA. In the form (4), ISRA is a particular case of a more general
construct data from a scanner with a spatially variant point spread algorithm introduced by Chahine [4] for the solution of linear sys-
function. The algorithm is a modification of the expectation max- tems arising from the discretization of integral equations typically
imization (EM) algorithm applied to the maximum likelihood (ML) arising in applications of the radiative transfer equations. A few
model. In [6], ISRA and EM algorithms are compared on phantom convergence results are known for the Chahine algorithm [2],
data, and computational advantages of ISRA are pointed out, but [5], all of them aiming to prove convergence to a solution of the
the algorithm is motivated in a descriptive manner and no theoret- linear system
ical convergence results are presented. Mx = q (5)
In this correspondence we show that the sequence generated by
ISRA from any strictly positive starting point converges globally where q is a positive vector and M a nonnegative matrix with non-
to a nonnegative least-squares solution of the linear system asso- zero rows. In the particular case of ECT, q and M satisfy those
ciated with the data collection. Furthermore, we show that ISRA conditions because b is strictly positive and A has no zero rows.
is a particular case of a well-known method commonly used for Furthermore, M will be symmetric nonnegative definite and the
solving inversion problems in remote sensing and indirect mea- sequence (4) is well defined.
surements. Finally, we give some suggestions in order to improve Our claim is that, with the conditions above on M and q, the
the algorithm's performance based on previous numerical experi- sequence (4) always converges to a solution of the optimization
ence with other related algorithms. problem:
II. THE ALGORITHM
minimize f(x) = 2 XTMX - xTq (6)
The basic problem in ECT is to estimate the emission density subject to x 2 0 (7)
xj, where j is the source pixel ( 1 < j c n), given measurements where x 2 0 means componentwise. The Kuhn-Tucker conditions
bi, where bi is the number of coincidences counted in the ith coin- (KTC) (see, e.g., [1]) for the problem (6), (7) are:
cident detector element pair or projection ( 1 c i c mi). We denote
by aij the normalized probability that an event emitted from pixel j x ((mj,x) - qj) = 0 (8)
is assigned to projection i with
m
xj1 0, (9)
I
.E aii
= 1
= 1. (1) (mj,x)
qj 2 0. - ( 10)
The vector x satisfies (8)-(10) if and only if it is a solution of (6),
The inner product of the ith row of a matrix ai and a vector x will (7) because M is symmetric nonnegative definite and therefore (6),
be denoted by (7) is a convex optimization problem with the simple linear con-
n
straints x . 0.
( ai, x ) = Z ajxj (2)
J=I III. CONVERGENCE RESULTS
and the square norm of a vector x will be Let us show now that f is a nonincreasing function of the se-
llx 112 = (X, x) . quence (4).
Lemma 1: For k = 0, 1, 2, * * ,f(x(k+ )) cf(x(k)).
The transpose of a matrix M is referred to as MT. Proof: Expanding f in Taylor series at the point x (k) and eval-
uating f at x(k + 1) we obtain:
Manuscript received November 13, 1986; revised March 30, 1987. This
work was supported by the National Institutes of Health under Grant f(x(k)) _f(x(k+l)) = (q - MXA(k))T (x(k+I) _ X(k))
HL28438.
The author is with the Medical Image Processing Group, Department of - l(X(k+l) - x(k)) T M(X (k + 1) - X (k)).
Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104 on leave
from the Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Matematica, (11)
Rio de Janeiro, R.J., 21.910 Brazil.
IEEE Log Number 8714842. It is worthwhile noting that (q - Mx (k))T (x (k+1) - x(k)) is non-

0278-0062/87/0600-0174$01.00 © 1987 IEEE

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, VOL. MI-6, NO. 2, JUNE 1987 175

negative, i.e., the algorithm always chooses a descent direction. so x(k'I 1) tends to x* and this implies that x* is a fixed point of the
This is an additional theoretical motivation for the definition of the algorithm. On the other hand, if xj > 0, it satisfies (8)-(10); if
sequence together with the fact that any solution of (8)-(10) is a Xj 0 and ( mj, x* > - qj < 0 we arrive to a contradiction because
fixed point of (4). qj / ( mj, x ) will be greater than one in a neighborhood of x*. Then
Taking into account that 4 satisfies (8)-(10) for all j.
We are able now to prove our main result.
x(k±l) _ x(k) = Dk(q - AIX (k)) (12) Theorem: If M is a nonnegative definite matrix with positive
with Dk a diagonal matrix with strictly positive entries x (k) / ( mj, diagonal elements, every sequence generated by (4) has a subse-
quence that converges to a solution of the optimization problem
x(> > j = 1, * **, n, we have that (6), (7). Furthermore, if the matrix is nonsingular, the entire se-
(X(k+ 1) - x(k))T M(x(k+ I) - X(k)) quence converges.
Proof: For every j we have that x(k) < qj/(mjj + ri,j
(qqj (m1, x(k)) ) 2 mI(x k)/x(k))) < qj / mjj, then the sequence is bounded and it has
a convergent subsequence that converges to a solution of (6), (7)
= E
K (ij, x (k)) m3j(x5k))2 because of Lemma 2. If M is nonsingular, the solution is unique
and the entire sequence converges.
+ E (qi (m-x(k)))(qj - (m,x(k)>)
i<j (m,x(k))(mj,x(k))
M IV. CONCLUDING REMARKS
* (mij + mji) x(k)Xjk)- (13) We showed in this correspondence that the ISRA algorithm for
But ECT converges to a solution of the problem

(qi -(< mi, X(k)) 2

qi< mi, x(k
(q3
i
-
mj, x(k) ) 2 minimize I11 Ax - b ||
- ((i, (k) ) J/ xk
( in, X(k)
subject to x 2 0.
-2 ((qi -
,
nJ jX )>o (14) In spite of the fact that least-squares estimators are theoretically
worse than maximum likelihood estimators, usually obtained by
applying the EM algorithm, we point out several important advan-
Multiplying both sides of (14) by x k)Xkk)mij (observe that mij = tages of ISRA together with those remarked in [6]. The first one is
mji) and substituting the resulting inequalities in (13) we deduce that estimators may be improved by means of a quadratic pe-
that nalization term, as in [7] for the ML model, but, in our case, it
will be possible to handle the quadratic term with an associated
(x(k±l) - xk)TM(x(k+]) - x(k)) matrix not necessarily diagonal. The second is that an acceleration
< (q - (j, X(k) x (k) of the method using linear search as in [8] may be achieved by
computing the minimum in the given direction in only one step,
j=1 (mj, x(k)) and the third is that, once established the relation between ISRA
and Chahine's algorithm, all the experimental and theoretical back-
( E maiX' ) ) ~~(15) ground of the closely related area of inversion in remote sensing
and indirect measurements could be used to improve ISRA's per-
formance.
But the second factor on the right-hand side of (15) is 1, so
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
(X(k + 1) - x(k))T M(x(k+ 1) - x(k))
The author is grateful to R. M. Lewitt and Y. Censor for useful
Mx(k))T (X(k+l) - X(k))
(q - (16)
discussions and to Y. Censor for bringing [2], [4], and [5] to his
Therefore, using (12) and (16) we obtain the inequality attention.
f(x(k)) - f(X(k+ I)) REFERENCES
> 2(x(k±l) _ x(k))TDk l(x(k+1) - x(k)) 2 0 (17) [1] M. Avriel, Nonlinear Programming: Analysis and Methods. Engle-
wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1976.
and the result follows. [2] V. Barcilon, "On Chahine's relaxation method for the radiative trans-
fer equation," J. Atmos, Sci., vol. 32, pp. 1626-1630, 1975.
Lemma 2: If M has a positive diagonal, any limit point of (4) is [3] R. Bellman, Introduction to Matrix Analysis. New York: McGraw-
a solution of problem (6), (7). Hill, 2nd ed., 1970.
Proof: From (19) and the fact that [4] M. T. Chahine, "Inverse problems in radiative transfer: Determination
of atmospheric parameters," J. Atmos Sci., vol. 27, pp. 960-967,
(in3,x(k)) 1970.
Xj x(k) 2 mjj > 0, forj = 1, ,n (18) [5] W. P. Chu, "Convergence of Chahine's nonlinear relaxation inversion
method used for limb viewing remote sensing," Appl. Opt., vol. 24,
we have that no. 4, pp. 445-447.
[6] M. E. Daube-Witherspoon and G. Muehllehner, "An iterative image
f(x(k)) -f(X(k+l)) 2 CIlX(k+) x(k) 112 (19) - space reconstruction algorithm suitable for volume ECT," IEEE Trans.
Med. Imaging, vol. MI-5, pp. 61-66, 1986.
with C = 2 min (in3) > 0. On the other hand, f (x (k)) is bounded [7] E. Levitan and G. T. Herman, "A maximum a posteriori probability
because it is decreasing and it has a limit point by hypothesis, then expectation maximization algorithm for image reconstruction in emis-
f (x k)) f(x(k+) ) tends to zero and so Ilx(k+l) - x (k)I. Ifx(ki) sion tomography," to be published.
is a convergent subsequence with limnit x*, we have that, [8] R. M. Lewitt and G. Muehllehner, "Accelerated iterative reconstruc-
tion for positron emission tomography based on the EM algorithm for
jx (k++ X(k,+ 1) X(k,) || j|X(kI) maximum likelihood estimators," IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging, vol. MI-
- x* || c _ + X* 11 5, pp. 16-22, 1986.