Current-voltage measurements in electrical impedance tomography can be partially ordered with respect to definiteness of the associated self-adjoint Neumann-to-Dirichlet operators (NtD). With this ordering, a point-wise larger conductivity leads to smaller current-voltage measurements, and smaller conductivities lead to larger measurements.We present a converse of this simple monotonicity relation and use it to solve the shape reconstruction (aka inclusion detection) problem in EIT. The outer shape of a region where the conductivity differs from a known background conductivity can be found by simply comparing the measurements to that of smaller or larger test regions. † Birth name: Bastian Gebauer,
The most accurate model for real-life electrical impedance tomography is the complete electrode model, which takes into account electrode shapes and (usually unknown) contact impedances at electrode-object interfaces. When the electrodes are small, however, it is tempting to formally replace them by point sources. This simplifies the model considerably and completely eliminates the effect of contact impedance. In this work we rigorously justify such a point electrode model for the important case of having difference measurements ("relative data") as data for the reconstruction problem. We do this by deriving the asymptotic limit of the complete model for vanishing electrode size. This is supplemented by an analogous result for the case that the distance between two adjacent electrodes also tends to zero, thus providing a physical interpretation and justification of the so-called backscattering data introduced by two of the authors.
A prominent result of Arridge and Lionheart (1998 Opt. Lett. 23 882-4) demonstrates that it is in general not possible to simultaneously recover both the diffusion (aka scattering) and the absorption coefficient in steadystate (dc) diffusion-based optical tomography. In this work we show that it suffices to restrict ourselves to piecewise constant diffusion and piecewise analytic absorption coefficients to regain uniqueness. Under this condition both parameters can simultaneously be determined from complete measurement data on an arbitrarily small part of the boundary.
This work extends monotonicity-based methods in inverse problems to the case of the Helmholtz (or stationary Schrödinger) equation (∆ + k 2 q)u = 0 in a bounded domain for fixed non-resonance frequency k > 0 and real-valued scattering coefficient function q. We show a monotonicity relation between the scattering coefficient q and the local Neumann-Dirichlet operator that holds up to finitely many eigenvalues. Combining this with the method of localized potentials, or Runge approximation, adapted to the case where finitely many constraints are present, we derive a constructive monotonicity-based characterization of scatterers from partial boundary data. We also obtain the local uniqueness result that two coefficient functions q 1 and q 2 can be distinguished by partial boundary data if there is a neighborhood of the boundary part where q 1 ≥ q 2 and q 1 ≡ q 2 . and the local (or partial) Neumann-to-Dirichlet (NtD) operatorwhere u ∈ H 1 (Ω) solves (1.1) with Neumann data ∂ ν u| ∂Ω = g on Σ, 0 else.Here Σ ⊆ ∂Ω is assumed to be an arbitrary non-empty relatively open subset of ∂Ω.Since k is a non-resonance frequency, Λ(q) is well defined and is easily shown to be a self-adjoint compact operator.We will show that2. The Helmholtz equation in a bounded domain. We start by summarizing some properties of the Neumann-to-Dirichlet-operators, discuss well-posedness and the role of resonance frequencies, and state a unique continuation result for the Helmholtz equation in a bounded domain.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.