Perception of temporally filtered X-ray fluoroscopy images.
For noisy X-ray fluoroscopy image sequences we quantitatively evaluated image quality after digital temporal filtering to reduce noise. Using an experimental paradigm called a reference/test adaptive forced-choice method we compared detectability of stationary low-contrast disks in filtered and unfiltered, computer-generated image sequences. In the first experiment, a low-pass first-order recursive filter used in X-ray fluoroscopy was found to be much less effective at enhancing detectability than predicted from the reduction of display noise variance, a common measurement of filter effectiveness. Detectability was reasonably predicted by a nonprewhitening human-observer model (NPW-HVS) that included an independently determined human temporal-contrast-sensitivity function. In another experiment, designed to test models over a range of temporal frequencies, we used paired high-pass and low-pass temporal filters that both reduced noise variance by 25%. The high-pass filter was artificially applied to the noise only and greatly improved detectability, while the low-pass filter had little effect. The human-observer model quantitatively described the measurements, but classical prewhitening and nonprewhitening signal detectors did not. As compared to the nonprewhitening, spatio-temporal matched filter, human-observer efficiency was low and variable at 2.1%, 2.9%, and 0.06% for 60 frames of unfiltered low-pass and high-pass noise, respectively. As compared to this detector, humans were not very effective at combining information across frames. On the other hand, signal to noise ratios (SNR's) from the human-observer model were comparable to human performance, and efficiencies were reasonably constant at 40%, 52%, and 32%, respectively. We conclude that it is imperative to include human-observer models and experiments in the analysis of noise-reduction filtering of noisy image sequences, such as X-ray fluoroscopy.