November 27, 2006
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. 42A38, 42B08, 42B15.The first author was supported by the Bulgarian Ministry of Science and Education under Project MM–1402/2004. The second author was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant DMS-0201669
.
Reconstruction of a polynomial from its Radon projections
Borislav Bojanov and Yuan Xu
Department of Mathematics, University of Sofia, Blvd. James Boucher 5, 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria E-mail address : boris@fmi.uni-sofia.bg Department of Mathematics, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403-1222.
E-mail address : yuan@math.uoregon.edu
-
Abstract.
A polynomial of degree
in two variables is shown to be uniquely determined by its Radon projections taken over
parallel lines in each of the
equidistant directions along the unit circle.
1 Introduction
Let
be a function defined on the unit disk
on the plane. A Radon projection of
is the integral of
over a line segment inside
. More precisely, for any given pair
of a real number
and any angle
, let
denote the line segment inside the unit disk
, where the line passes through the point
and is perpendicular to the vector
. Then
|
(1.1)
|
defines the Radon projection of
on the line segment
.
The Radon transform
associates to
a family of univariate functions of
, parameterized by
. The problem of reconstructing
from full or partial knowledge of
has been studied by many authors. It plays an essential role in the computer tomography. It is well-known that the set of Radon projections
determines
completely. Furthermore, it is known that if
has compact support in
, then
is uniquely determined by any infinite set of Radon projections [15] . In practice, however, the data set is usually finite. Thus, the main problem is to obtain a good approximation to the function from a large collection of its Radon projections. See [12] for the background and detail discussions. Using a finite data set, one may determine a polynomial whose Radon projections agree with the given data. Such an approach has been considered in [9, 10, 11] in connection with computer tomography.
The present paper concerns with the problem of whether a polynomial of degree
in two variables can be uniquely determined from a set of
distinct Radon projections. The solution depends on the arrangement of the lines on which the projections are taken. One solution was given early in [11] , in which the Radon projections are taken over all possible line segments
joining
and
, where
are
equally spaced points on the boundary of the unit disk
. In [6] (see also [4] ), a more general result was proved, in which
are
distinct points on the boundary of a convex set and the result was extended in [7] to higher dimensions. Recently this question was considered in [1] , in which the lines are taken in
directions, with one line in the first direction, two lines in the second direction, etc. This set has the drawback of lacking symmetry.
The main result of the present paper shows that a set of Radon projections taken over
parallel lines on each of the
equidistant directions can determine a polynomial of degree
uniquely. The set of the corresponding line segments possesses a rotation symmetry. If
is a fixed positive integer, then our method requires the Radon data in
directions, which are taken to be in equally spaced angles along the unit circle, and in each direction we take
parallel lines, associated to
. We prove that for almost all choices of
a polynomial
of degree
in two variables is uniquely determined by the set of its Radon projections over these line segments; more precisely, for any given
,
is uniquely determined such that
|
(1.2)
|
The similar construction works for
. Several examples of the sets of points
that define regular interpolation are given. Furthermore, the polynomial
can be easily computed. Thus, the result appears to offer a simple way to recover a polynomial from its Radon data.
The number of conditions 1.2 is equal to
, which is the dimension of the space of bivariate polynomials of total degree at most
. Hence, 1.2 can be interpreted as an interpolation problem by polynomials based on line integrals. As in the case of interpolation based on points, this bivariate problem is not always regular. The only general configurations in the literature that hold for every integer
are that of Hakopian [7] mentioned above and the non-symmetric configuration given recently in [1] . The result of the present paper provides another family of examples. The proof is based on an observation that recovering polynomials from their Radon projections can be reduced, using a formula in [11] , to a family of univariate interpolation problems that uses certain special classes of algebraic polynomials. In the case of [1] , the strategy of solving the interpolation problem resembles the approach that uses the Bezout theorem for pointwise interpolation.
The approach in the present paper follows the strategy of [2] , which uses equally spaced points on circles for pointwise interpolation, that allows one to step beyond the limitation of the Bezout Theorem. The paper is organized as follows. In the following section we prove the existence and the uniqueness of the reconstructing problem. In Section 3 we show how to construct the polynomial and give an outline of the algorithm.
2 The existence and the uniqueness of the solution
2.1 Preliminary
Let
denote the unit disk on the plane. Let
be the angle in the polar coordinates
A line
whose slope is
is defined by the equation
where
is a real number. Clearly the line
passes through the point
and is perpendicular to the vector
. Since, for a fixed
, the line corresponding to
coincides with the line corresponding to
, we could assume
. Alternatively, we could assume that
and
.
We will also use
to denote the set of points on the line
and introduce the notation
to denote the line segment of
inside
. The points on
can be represented as follows:
for
.
The Radon projection of a function
in the direction
with a parameter
is denoted by
,
| |
| |
In the literature it is also called an
-ray. It is clear that
so that we can assume, for the sake of definiteness, either
or
.
2.2 Polynomial bases
Let
denote the space of polynomials of total degree
in two variables, which has dimension
. If
then
Let
denote the Chebyshev polynomial of the second kind,
For
and
, the ridge polynomial
is defined by
Clearly
is an element of
and it is constant on every line that is perpendicular to
. The Radon projection of this function in any direction can be easily computed.
This is a result due to Marr [11] and it plays a central role in our discussion below.
Lemma 2.1.
For each
,
,
The following useful relation follows easily from Marr's formula ([10] ),
|
(2.1)
|
Let
denote the space of orthogonal polynomials of degree
on
with respect to the unit weight function; that is,
if
is of degree
and
For special choices of
and
, the equation 2.1 becomes an orthogonal relation.
Indeed, for
, let
For fixed
, the points
,
, are zeros of
. The ridge polynomials
have the remarkable orthogonal property that
. Since the dimension of
is
, it follows from 2.1 that the set
is a basis for
. In particular, this shows that the set
is a basis for
. Together with Lemma 2.1 , this proves the following result:
Lemma 2.2.
Every polynomial
can be written uniquely as
|
(2.2)
|
Furthermore, for each
and
,
|
(2.3)
|
There are several other explicit orthogonal bases for
; see, for example, [5] . If
is an orthogonal basis of
, then it was shown in [16] that
|
(2.4)
|
One explicit basis of
, denoted by
, is given in terms of polar coordinates as follows (cf. [5] ),
| |
| |
where
denotes the usual Jacobi polynomial,
and
for
. Using this basis and restricting
to the boundary of
, the equation 2.4 becomes
|
(2.5)
|
|
(2.6)
|
|
(2.7)
|
The above equations also follow from the elementary trigonometric identities
with
replaced by
and
, respectively. These relations allow us to rewrite 2.3 in a form that is easier to work with. In the following we use
to denote the integer part of
.
Lemma 2.3.
Let
be given as in 2.2 . Then
|
(2.8)
|
| |
in which the coefficients
in 2.2 and
,
are related by
|
(2.9)
|
for
,
, and
|
(2.10)
|
for
,
.
-
Proof.
We only prove the case of
. Comparing 2.3 and 2.8 shows that
| |
| |
| |
Using the equations in 2.5 we can rewrite the left hand side in the form of the right hand side, which leads to the equations:
for
and
satisfies the above formula with
, and
| |
| |
for
. For fixed
, the above linear relations can be written in the matrix form. After a proper normalization, the coefficient matrix turns out to be an orthogonal matrix. For example, for the even indices, we have
The
matrix in the left hand side, including the factor
, is orthogonal. Hence, the linear system of equations can be easily reversed, which leads to the stated relations 2.9 and 2.10 . The formulas can also be verified directly by inserting 2.9 and 2.10 into the equations of
and
and using the well-known trigonometric identities such as
for
, where
if
and
otherwise, and the elementary trigonometric identities such as
. □
To reconstruct the polynomial, we will determine the coefficients
and
and use them in 2.9 and 2.10 to determine
in 2.2 . The following representation is useful.
Lemma 2.4.
Let
or
. Let
be given as in 2.2 .
Then
|
(2.11)
|
where
and for
,
|
(2.12)
|
|
(2.13)
|
-
Proof.
This comes from changing the order of summations in 2.8 . □
2.3 Existence and uniqueness of the solution
We now state the Radon projections from which the polynomial
can be uniquely recovered. These are given by
|
(2.14)
|
which consists of total
many projections, the same as the dimension of
. The angles are chosen to be equidistant,
|
(2.15)
|
The reason that we choose the equidistant angles lies in the lemma below, which plays a key role in our study. Such a lemma appears first in [2] and has been used in [3] and [17] .
Lemma 2.5.
For
and
with
or
,
| |
| |
where we assume that
if
.
-
Proof.
Using the expression in the previous lemma, the proof follows from the fact that
for
. □
For the expression in this lemma, the variable
is in
. We can also state the result for
, for which the sign before
and
will be reversed. It is easy to see that
modulus
. The two expressions are consistent with the fact that
.
We are now ready to prove our main result, which shows that the polynomial
can be uniquely determined by the data 2.14 . We need the following function classes: For
define
for
. We also consider
as a column vector in
and regard
as an
matrix. A set of points
in
is said to be asymmetric if
and
do not both belong to
.
Theorem 2.6.
Let
be a set of asymmetric distinct points in
such that the matrices
are all nonsingular, then the polynomial
is uniquely determined by the set 2.14 of its Radon projections.
-
Proof.
In order to prove that there is a unique solution, it is sufficient to show that if
for
and
, then
.
Setting its left hand side zero, the expression in Lemma 2.5 shows that
for
and
. The left hand side is a trigonometric polynomial of degree
and it vanishes on
points, hence, it follows from the uniqueness of the trigonometric interpolation that the coefficients have to be zero; that is,
|
(2.16)
|
|
(2.17)
|
for
. Since
and
have different parity, the coefficients in
will not combine and there are exactly
terms in this polynomial, written as a linear combination of the Chebyshev polynomials
. Let
and let
| |
| |
Furthermore, let
denote the matrix
.
The coefficients of the linear systems of equations in 2.16 are
,
for
, and
for
. Hence, in order to prove that 2.16 implies
,
for
, we need to show that these matrices are all invertible. However, it is easy to see that we have the relation
, which shows, in particular, that
. Thus, we can deal with
for
.
Furthermore,
contains only even polynomials
,
. Using the notation
, it follows that
is a polynomial of degree
, so that the matrix
is always invertible as
is a set of asymmetric distinct points. Thus, since
, our assumption on
implies that all matrices are invertible. □
A similar theorem holds in the case of
. First we need to define for
,
for
and
We will keep the notion
for the matrix built upon from the columns of
, which is an
matrix.
Theorem 2.7.
Let
be a set of asymmetric distinct points in
such that the matrices
are all nonsingular, then the polynomial
is uniquely determined by the set 2.14 of its Radon projections.
That the points
are all in
means that none of the points can be zero. In fact, since
is an odd polynomial,
contains only odd polynomials, which vanish at the origin. Otherwise, the proof of this theorem is similar to that of the previous theorem. In the case of
, the set
does not appear in the conditions of the theorem since the interpolation at distinct points in
by
is always regular.
Such a reduction of conditions does not appears to happen for
.
For each fixed
, the determinant of
can be consider as a polynomial function in
, so that
defines a hypersurface of dimension
. Hence, the determinant is not zero for almost all choices of
.
Evidently, the same holds true for
matrices. Hence, we have the following corollary:
Corollary 2.8.
For
or
and for almost all choices of distinct points
in
for
or in
for
, the polynomial
is uniquely determined by the set 2.14 of its Radon projections.
2.4 Choices of
We have shown that almost all choices of
will lead to the unique solution of recovering the polynomial. One may ask the question if any choice of
will work. The answer, however, is negative as the following example shows.
Example:
. By Theorem 2.6 we only have to choose
in
such that the set
has nonsingular determinant
.
Recall that
We can compute the determinant
explicitly and the result is
| |
| |
Since
, the first two terms in the square bracket are positive, while the third term could be negative. This shows, in particular, that
if one of the
is
or if two of
are less than
and the other one is greater than
. However,
can be zero for some choices of
.
On the positive side, we give two results that provides sets of points that will ensure the uniqueness of the reconstruction. The first result uses the following theorem due to Obrechkoff [13] .
Lemma 2.9.
Let
be a nonnegative weight function on an interval and let
be the orthogonal polynomials with respect to
. Denote by
the largest zero of
. Then the number of zeros of the polynomial
, where
are real numbers, in the interval
is at most the number of sign changes in the sequence of the coefficients
.
The Chebyshev polynomials
are orthogonal with respect to the weight function
on
, so that the above lemma implies the following:
Proposition 2.10.
Let
be a set of numbers that satisfies
|
(2.18)
|
Then the matrices
are all nonsingular.
-
Proof.
If one of the matrices, say
, were singular, there would be a nonzero polynomial
that vanishes on
. This means that the number of zeros of
in
would be
. However, each set
has cardinality
so that the number of sign changes in the sequence of the coefficients of
is at most
. This is a contradiction to the conclusion of the lemma. □
The set of points given in this proposition ensures the uniqueness of determining a polynomial by the set of its Radon projections. The condition 2.18 implies that all points are clustered toward the one end of the interval
. This appears to be neither practical nor a good choice for computation. In fact, the numerical test indicates that some of the matrices
tend to have very large condition numbers.
Our second positive result is more interesting. Here the points
are based on the zeros of the Chebyshev polynomials
. It is well-known that these zeros are given by
We state the result for
first.
Theorem 2.11.
Let
be any point in
such that
.
Let
for
. Then the matrices
in Theorem 2.6 are all nonsingular. Consequently, the polynomial
is uniquely determined by the set 2.14 of its Radon projection.
-
Proof.
It is easy to see that the set
is asymmetric. Hence, according to Theorem 2.6, we only need to show that
is invertible for each
.
Using the explicit expression of
, it is easy to see that
|
(2.19)
|
Indeed, since
and
, it follows from the addition formula that
, from which the equation follows.
Since
, we evidently have
where
is a submatrix of
with the column
and the row containing
of
removed. Using the equation 2.19 , we can replace all rows of
that contain even Chebyshev polynomials by rows that contain odd Chebyshev polynomials. More precisely, we replace the rows
for
by rows
, respectively. The new matrix has all elements given in terms of the Chebyshev polynomials of the odd degree; hence,
where
. Assuming now that this determinant is zero. Then there exists a non-zero polynomial,
, of the form
which vanishes at
. Since
is odd, it vanishes also at
.
Observe that the sets
and
do not overlap. We conclude that the polynomial
of degree
vanishes at
distinct points and, consequently, it vanishes identically, a contradiction. □
A similar theorem holds for
, which we state below.
Theorem 2.12.
Let
for
. Then the matrices
in Theorem 2.7 are all nonsingular. Consequently, the polynomial
is uniquely determined by the set 2.14 of its Radon projection.
The proof is similar to that of Theorem 2.11 and it uses the equation
which can be verified using elementary trigonometric identities.
We have conducted some numerical tests for identifying other sets of
for which the matrices
are nonsingular, so that the reconstruction of a polynomial from the set 2.14 of its Radon projections is unique. For
, it turns out that both the equidistant points in
and the Chebyshev points in
work out. See, however, the discussion at the end of the next section.
3 Reconstruction of polynomials
In this section we set up the algorithm that can be used to compute
from the Radon projections. We only consider the case
. Let
be the data
|
(3.1)
|
where
are given as in 2.15 and
are distinct numbers in
, chosen in advance, such that the linear systems of equations 3.2 and 3.3 below have unique solutions for all
.
Recall that the Lagrange interpolation by trigonometric polynomials is used in the proof of Theorem 2.6 . The Lagrange interpolation based on the points in 2.15 is given explicitly by (see, for example, [18] )
where we assume that
is the function being interpolated; that is,
for
. Using the well-known formula
we can write
in the standard form of a trigonometric polynomial,
where
| |
| |
For each
,
, we will use the above formulas with
and we shall write
and
for this particular
.
This will allow us to determine the values
,
and
for
.
The next step is to fix
and use the values of
, or
, or
for
to determine the coefficients of
and
. For this purpose we consider the following linear systems of equations: For
,
|
(3.2)
|
and for
,
|
(3.3)
|
The quantities
will be specified later. It is easy to see that the coefficient matrix of these systems of equations are
in Theorem 2.6 . There are total
system of linear equations, each of size
. Solving these equations with proper
will determine the coefficients of
and
.
The last step is to use 2.9 and 2.10 to get
, which are the coefficients of
in 2.2 .
Algorithm: Step 1. For
and
, compute
|
(3.4)
|
Step 2. Solve the systems of equations 3.2 and 3.3 to get the coefficients
and
in 2.8 :
Case 1. Solve the
systems of 3.2 and 3.3 for
to get
Case 2. Solve the
systems of 3.2 and 3.3 for
to get
| |
| |
where
.
Step 3. Substitute the output
and
in Step 2 into 2.9 and 2.10 to get
. Then the polynomial
is given by 2.2 .
The output of this algorithm is the polynomial
that satisfies 1.2 . The main computation appears to be the Step 2. Initial numerical experiments indicate that the linear systems of equations 3.2 and 3.3 are ill-conditioned. However, among the set of points that we tested, the largest condition number of the matrices corresponding to the equidistant points
,
, of
is smaller than that corresponding to the Chebyshev points
,
or the points in Theorem 2.11 .
As pointed out by one referee, it is perhaps not surprising that the matrices of the linear systems 3.2 and 3.3 are ill-conditioned. Solving these linear systems means inverting the Radon transform, while it is known that the Radon reconstruction problem is ill posed. Thus, for
large, the algorithm may not be useful for practical computation. On the other hand, our result shows that it is possible to determine a polynomial of degree
uniquely from a set of
Radon data that concurs with the parallel geometry. This appears to be of independent interest.
References
-
B. Bojanov and I. K. Georgieva, Interpolation by bivariate polynomials based on Radon projections, Studia Math, 162 (2004), 141 160.
-
B. Bojanov and Yuan Xu, On a Hermite interpolation by polynomials of two variables, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 39 (2002), 1780-1793.
-
B. Bojanov and Yuan Xu, On polynomial interpolation of two variables, J. Approx. Theory, 120 (2003), 267-282.
-
A.S. Cavaretta, C.A. Micchelli and A. Sharma, Multivariate interpolation and the Radon transform, Part I, Math. Z. 174 (1980), 263–279; Part II, in Quantitive Approximation, DeVore and K. Schemer eds., Acad. Press, New York, 1980, 49–62.
-
C. F. Dunkl and Yuan Xu, Orthogonal polynomials of several variables, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001.
-
H. Hakopian, Multivariate divided differences and multivariate interpolation of Lagrange and Hermite type, J. Approx. Theory, 34 (1982), 286-305.
-
H. Hakopian, Multivariate spline functions, B-spline basis and polynomial interpolation II, Studia Math., 79 (1984), 91-102.
-
H. Hakopian and S. Ismaeil, On a bivariate interpolation problem, J. Approx. Theory, 116 (2002), 76-99.
-
C. Hamaker and D. C. Solmon, The angles between the null spaces of
-rays, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 62 (1978), 1-23.
-
B. Logan and L. Shepp, Optimal reconstruction of a function from its projections, Duke Math. J. 42 (1975), 645-659.
-
R. Marr, On the reconstruction of a function on a circular domain from a sampling of its line integrals, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 45 (1974), 357-374.
-
F. Natterer, The mathetmaics of computerized tomography, Reprint of the 1986 original. Classics in Applied Mathematics, 32. SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 2001.
-
N. Obrechkoff, Zeros of Polynomials, BAN, Sofia, 1963 (in Bulgarian); English transl.: Bulgarian Academic Monographs 7, Marin Drinov Academic Publishing House, Sofia, 2003.
-
T. J. Rivlin, Chebyshev Polynomials: from Approximation Theory to Algebra and Number Theory, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York, 1990.
-
D. C. Solmon, The X-ray transform, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 56 (1976), 61-83.
-
Yuan Xu, Funk-Hecke formula for orthogonal polynomials on spheres and on balls, Bull. London Math. Soc. 32 (2000), 447-457.
-
Yuan Xu, Polynomial interpolation on the unit sphere, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 41 (2003), p. 751-766.
-
A. Zygmund, Trigonometric series, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1959.
Department of Mathematics, University of Sofia, Blvd. James Boucher 5, 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria E-mail address : boris@fmi.uni-sofia.bg Department of Mathematics, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403-1222.
E-mail address : yuan@math.uoregon.edu