Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 May 8.
Published in final edited form as: SIAM J Imaging Sci. 2018 May 8;11(2):1205–1229. doi: 10.1137/17M1123237

Table 2.

RMSE, SSIM, FSIM and CNR comparison between conventional FBP, NLM and ssNLM methods in the MC case.

Region Lung Bone ROI 1 ROI 2
Energy Method RMSE SSIM FSIM RMSE SSIM FSIM CNR
80 kVp FBP 18.383 0.471 0.656 9.628 0.607 0.765 1.2 20.4
NLM 17.136 0.914 0.924 14.122 0.914 0.897 3.7 27.2
ssNLM 8.297 0.924 0.969 4.477 0.980 0.966 5.5 56.4
100 kVp FBP 14.787 0.531 0.695 8.017 0.735 0.814 1.8 19.8
NLM 10.917 0.957 0.957 6.868 0.964 0.943 6.5 54.6
ssNLM 7.381 0.973 0.973 3.793 0.983 0.972 6.7 61.1
120 kVp FBP 14.212 0.559 0.723 7.777 0.733 0.804 2.1 20.8
NLM 15.583 0.958 0.963 8.505 0.974 0.961 6.6 65.0
ssNLM 7.417 0.963 0.974 3.557 0.984 0.974 6.9 65.1