Fix Varian loader direction and XIM parsing - #762
Conversation
|
have you tested this with Varian data? can you show me? or is this an AI random PR? |
|
Yes—I used AI assistance to prepare this PR, but it is a targeted parity fix rather than a speculative change. I tested it with TIGRE’s documented Varian CBCT resolution-phantom dataset: https://zenodo.org/records/8045749 Its TrueBeam 2.7 I also added regression coverage for both angle signs and for the |
|
Thanks! can you put both of your PRs here, remove the test files, and show me the before/after of the test, if anything changes? |
|
Consolidated #764 into this PR and removed the PR-specific test files as requested. Real-data before/after using TIGRE’s documented Varian CBCT resolution-phantom dataset:
The sample calibration XIM files use |
|
can you show the reconstruction differences before/after? To validate the code does indeed change the recon. |
|
I ran matched FDK reconstructions on TIGRE’s documented Varian CBCT resolution-phantom dataset. Both runs used 32 evenly spaced real projections, a fixed 128³ reconstruction geometry, and disabled detector/scatter corrections.
The reconstructed volumes differ:
The embedded central-slice comparison shows the base volume, corrected volume, and their absolute difference. |
…rection Fix Varian loader direction and XIM parsing
Summary
Real-data validation
Using TIGRE’s documented Varian CBCT resolution-phantom dataset:
https://zenodo.org/records/8045749
StartAngle=180.0,StopAngle=-20.0selectsCCand loads 10FilterBowtie_CC_*files.CWand loads 10FilterBowtie_CW_*files.compression=1.