4.5 Article

CONTACT ADAPTING ELECTRODE MODEL FOR ELECTRICAL IMPEDANCE TOMOGRAPHY

期刊

SIAM JOURNAL ON APPLIED MATHEMATICS
卷 82, 期 2, 页码 427-449

出版社

SIAM PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.1137/21M1396125

关键词

Key words; electrical impedance tomography; electrode models; varying contact admittance; Bayesian inversion; extended electrodes

资金

  1. Institut Francais de Finlande
  2. Embassy of France in Finland
  3. French Ministry of Higher Education, Research, and Innovation
  4. Finnish Society of Sciences and Letters
  5. Finnish Academy of Science and Letters
  6. Academy of Finland [312124, 314701, 320022]
  7. Academy of Finland (AKA) [314701, 320022, 312124, 320022, 314701, 312124] Funding Source: Academy of Finland (AKA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study proposes a new robust modeling method for contact electrodes in electrical impedance tomography. By assuming approximate knowledge about the electrodes' whereabouts and using a boundary admittivity function to determine their actual locations, the proposed method enables simultaneous reconstruction of the positions and strengths of the contacts.
Electrical impedance tomography is an imaging modality for extracting information on the interior structure of a physical body from boundary measurements of current and voltage. This work studies a new robust way of modeling the contact electrodes used for driving current patterns into the examined object and measuring the resulting voltages. The idea is to not define the electrodes as strict geometric objects on the measurement boundary but only to assume approximate knowledge about their whereabouts and let a boundary admittivity function determine the actual locations of the current inputs. Such an approach enables reconstructing the boundary admittivity, i.e., the locations and strengths of the contacts, at the same time and with analogous methods as the interior admittivity. The functionality of the new model is verified by two-dimensional numerical experiments based on water tank data.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据