ArticleScientific reports2026
Impact of Gaussian feathering on diagnostic metrics in tile-based micro-CT sinogram infilling.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tile-based sinogram infilling methods for micro-CT require merging overlapping output tiles to reconstruct full images. Gaussian feathering, the standard blending approach, produces visually seamless results but its effect on diagnostic image quality metrics has not been characterized. This study quantifies how Gaussian feathering affects noise power spectrum (NPS), modulation transfer function (MTF), noise equivalent quanta (NEQ), structural similarity index (SSIM), and peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) compared to nearest priority blending, also known as Voronoi partition blending. We mathematically derived the variance reduction mechanism in Gaussian blending and experimentally compared both methods using sinograms infilled by DeepFill v2 as a representative generative inpainting model, applied to a micro-CT quality assurance phantom reconstructed from 50% undersampled data. Gaussian feathering reduced variance by up to 19.6% at overlap centers, causing NPS reduction of up to 13.8% at low spatial frequencies and NEQ inflation of up to 38.5%. MTF showed mixed effects with improvements at low frequencies but reductions at high frequencies. SSIM and PSNR showed statistically significant differences: sinogram PSNR differed by 0.05 dB ([Formula: see text]) and reconstruction SSIM by 0.009 ([Formula: see text]), both with small effect sizes. In this experimental configuration, Gaussian feathering distorted diagnostic metrics through a variance reduction mechanism, while standard fidelity metrics detected only subtle changes. Nearest priority blending may be preferred when diagnostic metrics are used to validate infilling methods, pending broader empirical validation.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.