OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A


  • Vol. 15, Iss. 5 — May. 1, 1998
  • pp: 1355–1360

Bounds on null functions of linear digital imaging systems

Eric Clarkson and Harrison Barrett  »View Author Affiliations

JOSA A, Vol. 15, Issue 5, pp. 1355-1360 (1998)

View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (235 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



Any linear digital imaging system produces a finite amount of data from a continuous object. This means that there are always null functions, so a reconstruction of the object, even without noise in the system, will differ from the actual object. With positivity constraints, the size of a null function is limited, provided that size is measured by the integral of the absolute value of the null function. When smoothing is used in reconstruction, then smoothed null functions become relevant. There are bounds on various measures of the size of smoothed null functions, and these bounds can be quite small. Smoothing will decrease the effects of null functions in object reconstructions, and this effect is greater if the smoothing operator is well matched to the system operator.

© 1998 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(100.2000) Image processing : Digital image processing
(110.0110) Imaging systems : Imaging systems

Eric Clarkson and Harrison Barrett, "Bounds on null functions of linear digital imaging systems," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 15, 1355-1360 (1998)

Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset


  1. D. L. Snyder, M. I. Miller, L. J. Thomas, and D. G. Pollite, “Noise and edge artifacts in maximum-likelihood reconstructions for emission tomography,” IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 6, 228–238 (1987).
  2. H. L. Royden, Real Analysis (Macmillan, New York, 1968), Chap. 6, pp. 111–115.
  3. E. Clarkson and H. H. Barrett, “A bound on null functions for digital imaging systems with positivity constraints,” Opt. Lett. 22, 814–815 (1997).
  4. R. A. DeVore and G. G. Lorentz, Constructive Approximation (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993), Chap. 3, pp. 82–83.
  5. M. A. Kowalski, K. S. Sikorski, and F. Stenger, Selected Topics in Approximation and Computation (Oxford U. Press, New York, 1995), Chap. 1, pp. 39–41.
  6. D. Slepian and H. O. Pollack, “Prolate spheroidal wave functions, Fourier analysis and uncertainty I,” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 40, 43–63 (1961).
  7. H. J. Landau and H. O. Pollack, “Prolate spheroidal wave functions, Fourier analysis and uncertainty II,” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 40, 65–84 (1961).
  8. H. J. Landau and H. O. Pollack, “Prolate spheroidal wave functions, Fourier analysis and uncertainty III,” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 41, 1295–1336 (1962).
  9. R. Courant and D. Hilbert, Methods of Mathematical Physics (Interscience, New York, 1953), Chap. 3, pp. 132–134.
  10. D. L. Donoho and P. B. Stark, “Uncertainty principles and signal recovery,” SIAM J. Appl. Math. 49, 906–931 (1989).
  11. H. H. Barrett and H. Gifford, “Cone beam data with discrete data sets,” Phys. Med. Biol. 39, 451–476 (1994).

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited