pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.18817 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · ⚛️ physics.comp-ph · cs.NA· math.NA

Recognition: unknown

Nonuniform Iterative Phasing Framework and Sampling Requirements for 3D Dynamical Inversion from Coherent Surface Scattering Imaging

Jeffrey J. Donatelli , Miaoqi Chu , Zixi Hu , Zhang Jiang , Nicholas Schwarz , Jin Wang , James A. Sethian
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 02:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.comp-ph cs.NAmath.NA
keywords coherent surface scattering imaging3D reconstructioniterative phasingdynamical scatteringnonuniform Fourier transformphase retrievalX-ray diffractionnanostructure imaging
0
0 comments X

The pith

A nonuniform iterative phasing method reconstructs high-resolution 3D nanostructures from CSSI data at only one or two incident angles despite dynamical scattering.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces a reconstruction framework that merges iterative projection phasing with fast nonuniform Fourier inversion techniques to recover 3D density from grazing-incidence X-ray rotation series. This addresses the nonuniform sampling and dynamical scattering inherent to CSSI experiments on thin specimens. A sympathetic reader would care because the approach enables detailed 3D imaging of nanostructures with far fewer measurements than conventional methods demand. The work also derives theoretical sampling requirements and uniqueness conditions for such data. Validation on simulated conical Siemens star and porous medium structures shows accurate recovery even when dynamical effects are significant.

Core claim

The central claim is that an iterative-projection phasing framework combined with fast nonuniform Fourier inversion methods can efficiently reconstruct isolated 3D structures from CSSI rotation-series data involving nonuniformly sampled Fourier values and dynamical scattering, with data from as few as one or two incident angles sufficing for high-resolution results.

What carries the argument

The nonuniform iterative phasing framework, which integrates iterative-projection-based phasing techniques with fast nonuniform Fourier inversion methods to handle nonuniform sampling and dynamical scattering in the data.

If this is right

  • High-resolution 3D structures can be recovered from CSSI data collected at only one or two incident angles even with significant dynamical scattering present.
  • Theoretical analysis yields specific requirements on experimental parameters such as angular sampling and characterizes conditions for unique solutions.
  • The same nonuniform reconstruction approach supplies a foundation for other phase-retrieval problems that involve nonlinear combinations of nonuniformly sampled Fourier values.
  • The method works for both isolated nanostructures and porous media when the dynamical scattering is accounted for inside the iterative projections.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Reducing the number of required angles could shorten beamtime at synchrotron facilities for 3D nanostructure imaging.
  • The uniqueness conditions derived here may guide experimental design choices in related coherent scattering geometries beyond CSSI.
  • The framework's handling of nonuniform Fourier data opens a path to generalizations that incorporate additional physical effects such as partial coherence without new parameters.
  • Application to experimental rather than simulated CSSI datasets would test whether the isolated-specimen assumption holds under realistic substrate interactions.

Load-bearing premise

The specimen is isolated and dynamical scattering effects can be incorporated or mitigated inside the iterative projection framework without introducing extra unknown parameters.

What would settle it

A reconstruction from real one-angle CSSI data on a known test structure such as a conical Siemens star that fails to match the true 3D density or produces persistent artifacts inconsistent with the input model would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18817 by James A. Sethian, Jeffrey J. Donatelli, Jin Wang, Miaoqi Chu, Nicholas Schwarz, Zhang Jiang, Zixi Hu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Experimental CSSI geometry [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Example of the Fresnel reflection coefficient magnitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Four scattering events (Top) modeled by DWBA, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. High-level illustration of the proposed CSSI reconstruction framework, with computational representations shown beneath [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Illustration of the staggered CSSI intensity grid. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Illustration of the DWBA grid (defined in Eq. 55) and comparison to its associated staggered CSSI intensity grid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Flow diagram for the nonuniform iterative phasing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Illustrations of how the CSSI rotation series samples [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Illustration of the missing candlestick region. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. 2D slices of the calculated weights [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. DWBA reflection coefficient magnitudes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Fourier shell correlation (FSC) for the reconstructions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. DWBA reflection coefficient magnitudes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Fourier shell correlation (FSC) for the reconstruc [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. Fourier shell correlation (FSC) for the reconstructions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. Fourier shell correlation (FSC) for the reconstructions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19. Fourier shell correlation (FSC) for the reconstructions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18. Fourier shell correlation (FSC) for the reconstructions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: FIG. 20. Ground truth and reconstructions of the porous medium from staggered CSSI intensity grid data. For each example, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: FIG. 21. Ground truth and reconstructions of the conical Siemens star from staggered CSSI intensity grid data. For each [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_21.png] view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: FIG. 22. Examples of the simulated CSSI diffraction images generated from the porous medium (PM) and conical Siemens star [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_22.png] view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: FIG. 23. 2D slices of the ground-truth porous-medium diffraction volumes compared with the diffraction volumes recovered [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_23.png] view at source ↗
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: FIG. 24. 2D slices of the ground-truth conical-Siemens-star diffraction volumes compared with the diffraction volumes recovered [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_24.png] view at source ↗
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: FIG. 25. Reconstructions of the porous medium and conical Siemens star from the reduced rotation-series data. For each object, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_25.png] view at source ↗
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: FIG. 26. Examples of noisy CSSI diffraction images simulated from the porous medium with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_26.png] view at source ↗
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: FIG. 27. Examples of noisy CSSI diffraction images simulated from the conical Siemens star with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p043_27.png] view at source ↗
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: FIG. 28. 2D slices of the CSSI diffraction volumes recovered from the porous-medium rotation-series data simulated with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_28.png] view at source ↗
Figure 29
Figure 29. Figure 29: FIG. 29. 2D slices of the CSSI diffraction volumes recovered from the conical-Siemens-star rotation-series data simulated with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_29.png] view at source ↗
Figure 30
Figure 30. Figure 30: FIG. 30. Reconstructions of the porous medium from its rotation-series data simulated with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p046_30.png] view at source ↗
Figure 31
Figure 31. Figure 31: FIG. 31. Reconstructions of the conical Siemens star from its rotation-series data simulated with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_31.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Coherent surface scattering imaging (CSSI) is an emerging experimental technique uniquely suited to probing the structure of thin nanostructures. In these experiments, a specimen is placed on a substrate, and a series of X-ray diffraction patterns is collected at grazing incidence angles as the specimen is rotated. However, reconstructing the specimen's 3D structure from the data is challenging due to dynamical scattering effects induced by the experimental geometry and the lack of direct phase measurements. Specifically, the data involves nonuniformly sampled Fourier-transform values of the specimen density, and failure to effectively address this nonuniformity can lead to errors or degraded performance. Here we introduce a mathematical inversion framework that combines iterative-projection-based phasing techniques with new fast nonuniform Fourier inversion methods to efficiently reconstruct isolated 3D structures from their CSSI rotation-series data. We also analyze the theoretical properties of CSSI reconstruction to derive requirements on experimental parameters and characterize solution uniqueness. We validate our approach using CSSI data simulated from a conical Siemens star and a porous medium, demonstrating that high-resolution 3D structures can be reconstructed even in the presence of significant dynamical scattering, from data collected at as few as one or two incident angles. More broadly, the presented nonuniform reconstruction framework provides a foundation for solving challenging generalizations of the phase problem in which measurements involve nonlinear combinations of nonuniformly sampled Fourier values.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a nonuniform iterative phasing framework for 3D reconstruction of isolated structures from Coherent Surface Scattering Imaging (CSSI) rotation-series data. It combines established iterative projection phasing methods with fast nonuniform Fourier transform techniques to handle nonuniformly sampled Fourier values and dynamical scattering effects. The authors derive theoretical sampling requirements and solution uniqueness conditions under the isolated-specimen model, then validate the approach via simulations on a conical Siemens star and a porous medium, claiming that high-resolution 3D reconstructions remain feasible from as few as one or two incident angles despite significant dynamical scattering.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work would provide a useful computational foundation for CSSI-based 3D imaging of thin nanostructures, reducing the experimental burden of multi-angle data collection. The application of standard phasing and NUFFT tools to this specific nonuniform geometry, together with the explicit sampling/uniqueness analysis, represents a clear incremental advance. The simulated validations on two distinct test objects lend concrete support, though the absence of real experimental data and quantitative error metrics in the reported results limits the immediate strength of the robustness claims.

major comments (2)
  1. [Validation section] Validation section: The simulated reconstructions on the conical Siemens star and porous medium are presented as evidence that high-resolution 3D recovery is possible from one or two angles even with dynamical scattering, but no quantitative error metrics (e.g., R-factor, MSE, or Fourier shell correlation values) or resolution estimates are reported. This omission is load-bearing for the central claim of robustness, as visual inspection alone does not substantiate the 'high-resolution' or 'significant dynamical scattering' assertions.
  2. [Theoretical analysis] Theoretical analysis: The uniqueness and sampling requirements are derived under the isolated-specimen model with dynamical scattering incorporated into the forward operator. The paper should explicitly test or bound the sensitivity of the reconstruction to violations of isolation (e.g., extended substrate effects or model mismatch), as this assumption underpins the claim that no additional free parameters are needed.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The claim of successful reconstruction 'even in the presence of significant dynamical scattering' would be strengthened by including at least one quantitative performance metric from the simulations.
  2. [Discussion] The manuscript would benefit from a brief discussion of how the framework behaves under realistic noise levels or partial coherence, even if only as a forward-looking remark.
  3. [Methods] Notation for the nonuniform sampling operator and the projection operators could be introduced with a small table or explicit equation reference to improve readability for readers unfamiliar with CSSI geometry.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive review and recommendation of minor revision. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Validation section] Validation section: The simulated reconstructions on the conical Siemens star and porous medium are presented as evidence that high-resolution 3D recovery is possible from one or two angles even with dynamical scattering, but no quantitative error metrics (e.g., R-factor, MSE, or Fourier shell correlation values) or resolution estimates are reported. This omission is load-bearing for the central claim of robustness, as visual inspection alone does not substantiate the 'high-resolution' or 'significant dynamical scattering' assertions.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative metrics would strengthen the validation. In the revised manuscript we will add R-factor, MSE, and Fourier shell correlation (FSC) curves comparing the reconstructions to ground truth for both test objects, computed across the one- and two-angle cases with varying dynamical scattering strengths. These additions will quantify resolution and reconstruction fidelity beyond visual inspection. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Theoretical analysis] Theoretical analysis: The uniqueness and sampling requirements are derived under the isolated-specimen model with dynamical scattering incorporated into the forward operator. The paper should explicitly test or bound the sensitivity of the reconstruction to violations of isolation (e.g., extended substrate effects or model mismatch), as this assumption underpins the claim that no additional free parameters are needed.

    Authors: The isolated-specimen model is essential to our derivation of sampling requirements and uniqueness conditions. We will revise the theoretical analysis section to include an explicit discussion bounding the sensitivity to small violations of isolation, such as weak substrate scattering terms, and note that the approximation holds for the thin nanostructures targeted by CSSI. A full numerical sensitivity study lies outside the present scope, but the added bounds will clarify the robustness of the no-extra-parameter claim. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Established phasing and NUFFT methods applied to CSSI geometry; no equations reduce output to fitted inputs or self-citations

full rationale

The derivation combines standard iterative projection phasing with nonuniform FFT inversion for the CSSI rotation series under an isolated-specimen model. Uniqueness and sampling requirements are derived directly from the nonuniform Fourier sampling geometry without reducing to fitted parameters or prior self-citations as load-bearing premises. Simulations use forward models consistent with the inverse but do not force the reconstruction result by construction. No self-definitional loops, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or ansatz smuggling appear in the framework description.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The approach rests on standard Fourier analysis and phase retrieval assumptions plus domain-specific modeling of grazing-incidence geometry; no new physical entities are postulated.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Measurements correspond to nonuniformly sampled Fourier transforms of an isolated specimen density.
    Invoked to justify the need for nonuniform inversion methods.
  • standard math Iterative projections can enforce consistency with the measured magnitudes and support constraints.
    Core of the phasing technique.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5568 in / 1208 out tokens · 37651 ms · 2026-05-10T02:41:50.881143+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Clipped cylindrical grid, constructed with 1621 angles uniformly spaced in [0 , 2π), 258 radii uniformly spaced in [0, √ 2 2 ), and 15 heights uniformly spaced in [0 , 1 2), with all points outside of the box [ − 1 2 , 1 2] × [− 1 2 , 1 2] × [− 1 2 , 1 2] removed

  2. [2]

    DWBA grid, described in Section V C, forJ= 1 inci- dent angle αi = 0.26 and (2·121−1)×(2·121−1)×(8·31) grid points

  3. [3]

    ILLUMINE - Intelligent Learning for Light Source and Neutron Source User Mea- surements Including Navigation and Experiment Steering

    8 · 121 · 121 · 31 random 3D coordinates whose com- ponents are sampled from a uniform distribution over the interval [− 1 2 , 1 2]. The Fourier data for each object is simulated on each of the above sampling sets via an NUFFT. For each of these Fourier sampling sets, we compute the weights w using two choices of pre-weight factors. The first set of weigh...

    2000

  4. [4]

    T. Sun, Z. Jiang, J. Strzalka, L. Ocola, and J. Wang, Three-dimensional coherent X-ray surface scattering imag- ing near total external reflection, Nat. Photon.6, 586 (2012)

    2012

  5. [5]

    Akinwande, N

    D. Akinwande, N. Petrone, and J. Hone, Two-dimensional flexible nanoelectronics, Nat. Commun.5, 5678 (2014)

    2014

  6. [6]

    W. L. Tan and C. R. McNeill, X-ray diffraction of pho- tovoltaic perovskites: Principles and applications, Appl. Phys. Rev.9(2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    P. R. Brown, D. Kim, R. R. Lunt, N. Zhao, M. G. Bawendi, J. C. Grossman, and V. Bulovic, Energy level modification in lead sulfide quantum dot thin films through ligand exchange, ACS Nano8, 5863 (2014)

    2014

  8. [8]

    Paracini, P

    N. Paracini, P. Gutfreund, R. Welbourn, J. F. Gonzalez- Martinez, K. Zhu, Y. Miao, N. Yepuri, T. A. Darwish, C. Garvey, S. Waldie,et al., Structural characterization of nanoparticle-supported lipid bilayer arrays by grazing incidence X-ray and neutron scattering, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces15, 3772 (2023)

    2023

  9. [9]

    D. N. Azulay, O. Spaeker, M. Ghrayeb, M. Wilsch- Br¨ auninger, E. Scoppola, M. Burghammer, I. Zizak, L. Bertinetti, Y. Politi, and L. Chai, Multiscale X-ray study of Bacillus subtilis biofilms reveals interlinked struc- tural hierarchy and elemental heterogeneity, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.119, e2118107119 (2022)

    2022

  10. [10]

    Jiang, J

    Z. Jiang, J. Anton, S. Kearney, S. Bean, M. Chu, J. Wang, D. Shu, and S. Narayanan, Design and performance of the coherent surface-scattering imaging solid sample station for the advanced photon source upgrade, inOptomechani- cal Engineering 2025, Vol. 13599 (SPIE, 2025) pp. 13–19

    2025

  11. [11]

    Kerby, The advanced photon source upgrade: A brighter future for X-ray science, Synchrotron Radiat

    J. Kerby, The advanced photon source upgrade: A brighter future for X-ray science, Synchrotron Radiat. News36, 26 (2023)

    2023

  12. [12]

    Shi, Y.-C

    X. Shi, Y.-C. Lin, J. Zhao, T. Toellner, M. Y. Hu, S. Seifert, B. Lee, W. Grizolli, M. J. Wojcik, L. Rebuffi, et al., Measurements of source emittance and beam coher- ence properties of the upgraded Advanced Photon Source, J. Synchrotron Radiat.32(2025)

    2025

  13. [13]

    H. N. Chapman, Fourth-generation light sources, IUCrJ 10, 246 (2023)

    2023

  14. [14]

    Hellert, S

    T. Hellert, S. Borra, M. Dach, B. Flugstad, T. Ford, S. Leemann, H. Nishimura, S. Omolayo, G. Portmann, T. Scarvie,et al., Status of the advanced light source, in Proc. IPAC’24, IPAC’24 - 15th International Particle Ac- celerator Conference No. 15 (JACoW Publishing, Geneva, Switzerland, 2024) pp. 1309–1312

    2024

  15. [15]

    Sinha, E

    S. Sinha, E. Sirota, S. Garoff, and H. Stanley, X-ray and neutron scattering from rough surfaces, Phys. Rev. B38, 2297 (1988)

    1988

  16. [16]

    R. W. Gerchberg, A practical algorithm for the determi- nation of phase from image and diffraction plane pictures, Optik35, 237 (1972)

    1972

  17. [17]

    J. R. Fienup, Reconstruction of an object from the mod- ulus of its Fourier transform, Opt. Lett.3, 27 (1978)

    1978

  18. [18]

    R. P. Millane, Phase retrieval in crystallography and optics, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A7, 394 (1990)

    1990

  19. [19]

    R. P. Millane, Recent advances in phase retrieval, in Image Reconstruction from Incomplete Data IV, Vol. 6316, edited by P. J. Bones, M. A. Fiddy, and R. P. Millane (SPIE, 2006) p. 63160E

    2006

  20. [20]

    D. R. Luke, Relaxed averaged alternating reflections for diffraction imaging, Inverse Probl.21, 37 (2004)

    2004

  21. [21]

    Elser, Phase retrieval by iterated projections, J

    V. Elser, Phase retrieval by iterated projections, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A20, 40 (2003)

    2003

  22. [22]

    Elser, I

    V. Elser, I. Rankenburg, and P. Thibault, Searching with iterated maps, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.104, 418 (2007)

    2007

  23. [23]

    Venkatakrishnan, J

    S. Venkatakrishnan, J. Donatelli, D. Kumar, A. Sarje, S. K. Sinha, X. S. Li, and A. Hexemer, A multi-slice simulation algorithm for grazing-incidence small-angle X-ray scattering, J. Appl. Crystallogr.49, 1876 (2016)

    2016

  24. [24]

    Myint, M

    P. Myint, M. Chu, A. Tripathi, M. J. Wojcik, J. Zhou, M. J. Cherukara, S. Narayanan, J. Wang, and Z. Jiang, Multislice forward modeling of coherent surface scattering imaging on surface and interfacial structures, Opt. Express 31, 11261 (2023)

    2023

  25. [25]

    M. Chu, Z. Jiang, M. Wojcik, T. Sun, M. Sprung, and J. Wang, Probing three-dimensional mesoscopic interfacial structures in a single view using multibeam X-ray coherent surface scattering and holography imaging, Nat. Commun. 14, 5795 (2023)

    2023

  26. [26]

    Myint, A

    P. Myint, A. Tripathi, M. J. Wojcik, J. Deng, M. J. Cherukara, N. Schwarz, S. Narayanan, J. Wang, M. Chu, and Z. Jiang, Three-dimensional hard X-ray ptycho- graphic reflectometry imaging on extended mesoscopic surface structures, APL Photon.9(2024). 34

    2024

  27. [27]

    J. Sung, Y. Gao, J. Griffith, Z. Gao, X. Huang, G. Williams, and Y. S. Chu, Automatic differentiation for X-ray grazing-incidence surface imaging using ptychogra- phy, inX-Ray Nanoimaging: Instruments and Methods VII, Vol. 13622 (SPIE, 2025) pp. 61–66

    2025

  28. [28]

    Marathe, S

    S. Marathe, S. Kim, S. Kim, C. Kim, H. Kang, P. Nick- les, and D. Noh, Coherent diffraction surface imaging in reflection geometry, Opt. Express18, 7253 (2010)

    2010

  29. [29]

    S. Roy, D. Parks, K. Seu, R. Su, J. Turner, W. Chao, E. Anderson, S. Cabrini, and S. Kevan, Lensless X-ray imaging in reflection geometry, Nat. Photon.5, 243 (2011)

    2011

  30. [30]

    Yefanov and I

    O. Yefanov and I. Vartanyants, Three dimensional re- construction of nanoislands from grazing-incidence small- angle X-ray scattering, Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top.167, 81 (2009)

    2009

  31. [31]

    J. W. Kim, M. J. Cherukara, A. Tripathi, Z. Jiang, and J. Wang, Inversion of coherent surface scattering images via deep learning network, Appl. Phys. Lett.119(2021)

    2021

  32. [32]

    Liu and K

    J. Liu and K. G. Yager, Unwarping GISAXS data, IUCrJ 5, 737 (2018)

    2018

  33. [33]

    Yang and S

    Y. Yang and S. K. Sinha, Three-dimensional imaging using coherent x rays at grazing incidence geometry, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A40, 1500 (2023)

    2023

  34. [34]

    Dutt and V

    A. Dutt and V. Rokhlin, Fast Fourier transforms for nonequispaced data, SIAM J. Sci. Comput.14, 1368 (1993)

    1993

  35. [35]

    Greengard and J.-Y

    L. Greengard and J.-Y. Lee, Accelerating the nonuniform fast Fourier transform, SIAM Rev.46, 443 (2004)

    2004

  36. [36]

    Wiener, Generalized harmonic analysis, Acta Math

    N. Wiener, Generalized harmonic analysis, Acta Math. 55, 117 (1930)

    1930

  37. [37]

    G. H. Vineyard, Grazing-incidence diffraction and the distorted-wave approximation for the study of surfaces, Phys. Rev. B26, 4146 (1982)

    1982

  38. [38]

    J. A. Fessler and B. P. Sutton, Nonuniform fast Fourier transforms using min-max interpolation, IEEE Trans. Sig- nal Process.51, 560 (2003)

    2003

  39. [39]

    Exponential of semicircle

    A. H. Barnett, J. Magland, and L. af Klinteberg, A parallel nonuniform fast Fourier transform library based on an “Exponential of semicircle” kernel, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 41, C479 (2019)

    2019

  40. [40]

    A. H. Barnett, Aliasing error of the exp(β √ 1−z 2) kernel in the nonuniform fast Fourier transform, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal.51, 1 (2021)

    2021

  41. [41]

    Kircheis and D

    M. Kircheis and D. Potts, Fast and direct inversion meth- ods for the multivariate nonequispaced fast Fourier trans- form, Front. Appl. Math. Stat.9, 1155484 (2023)

    2023

  42. [42]

    Wajer and K

    F. Wajer and K. Pruessmann, Major speedup of recon- struction for sensitivity encoding with arbitrary trajecto- ries, inProc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med 9(2001)

    2001

  43. [43]

    Ou,gNUFFTW: auto-tuning for high-performance GPU-accelerated non-uniform fast Fourier transforms, Tech

    T. Ou,gNUFFTW: auto-tuning for high-performance GPU-accelerated non-uniform fast Fourier transforms, Tech. Rep. UCB/EECS-2017-90 (University of California, Berkeley, 2017) http://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/ TechRpts/2017/EECS-2017-90.pdf

    2017

  44. [44]

    L. Wang, Y. Shkolnisky, and A. Singer, A Fourier-based approach for iterative 3D reconstruction from cryo-EM images, arXiv preprint arXiv:1307.5824 (2013)

    work page arXiv 2013

  45. [45]

    Choi and D

    H. Choi and D. C. Munson, Analysis and design of minimax-optimal interpolators, IEEE Trans. Signal Pro- cess.46, 1571 (1998)

    1998

  46. [46]

    J. G. Pipe and P. Menon, Sampling density compensation in MRI: rationale and an iterative numerical solution, Magn. Reson. Med.41, 179 (1999)

    1999

  47. [47]

    Rasche, R

    V. Rasche, R. Proksa, R. Sinkus, P. Bornert, and H. Eg- gers, Resampling of data between arbitrary grids using convolution interpolation, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging18, 385 (2002)

    2002

  48. [48]

    Greengard, J.-Y

    L. Greengard, J.-Y. Lee, and S. Inati, The fast sinc trans- form and image reconstruction from nonuniform samples in k-space, Commun. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci.1, 121 (2007)

    2007

  49. [49]

    Dutt and V

    A. Dutt and V. Rokhlin, Fast Fourier transforms for nonequispaced data, II, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal.2, 85 (1995)

    1995

  50. [50]

    Gelb and G

    A. Gelb and G. Song, A frame theoretic approach to the nonuniform fast Fourier transform, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 52, 1222 (2014)

    2014

  51. [51]

    Selva, Efficient type-4 and type-5 non-uniform FFT methods in the one-dimensional case, IET Signal Process

    J. Selva, Efficient type-4 and type-5 non-uniform FFT methods in the one-dimensional case, IET Signal Process. 12, 74 (2018)

    2018

  52. [52]

    Kircheis and D

    M. Kircheis and D. Potts, Direct inversion of the nonequi- spaced fast fourier transform, Linear Algebra Appl.575, 106 (2019)

    2019

  53. [53]

    Wilber, E

    H. Wilber, E. N. Epperly, and A. H. Barnett, Superfast direct inversion of the nonuniform discrete Fourier trans- form via hierarchically semiseparable least squares, SIAM J. Sci. Comput.47, A1702 (2025)

    2025

  54. [54]

    Hayes, The reconstruction of a multidimensional se- quence from the phase or magnitude of its Fourier trans- form, IEEE Trans

    M. Hayes, The reconstruction of a multidimensional se- quence from the phase or magnitude of its Fourier trans- form, IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process.30, 140 (1982)

    1982

  55. [55]

    L. M. Bregman, The relaxation method of finding the common point of convex sets and its application to the solution of problems in convex programming, USSR Com- put. Math. Math. Phys.7, 200 (1967)

    1967

  56. [56]

    H. H. Bauschke, P. L. Combettes, and D. R. Luke, Hybrid projection–reflection method for phase retrieval, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A20, 1025 (2003)

    2003

  57. [57]

    Elser, T.-Y

    V. Elser, T.-Y. Lan, and T. Bendory, Benchmark problems for phase retrieval, SIAM J. Imaging Sci.11, 2429 (2018)

    2018

  58. [58]

    Marchesini, H

    S. Marchesini, H. He, H. N. Chapman, S. P. Hau-Riege, A. Noy, M. R. Howells, U. Weierstall, and J. C. Spence, X-ray image reconstruction from a diffraction pattern alone, Phys. Rev. B68, 140101 (2003)

    2003

  59. [59]

    J. J. Donatelli, P. H. Zwart, and J. A. Sethian, Iterative phasing for fluctuation X-ray scattering, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.112, 10286 (2015)

    2015

  60. [60]

    Calvetti and E

    D. Calvetti and E. Somersalo, Inverse problems: From regularization to Bayesian inference, Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Stat.10, e1427 (2018)

    2018

  61. [61]

    J. J. Donatelli, J. A. Sethian, and P. H. Zwart, Recon- struction from limited single-particle diffraction data via simultaneous determination of state, orientation, inten- sity, and phase, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.114, 7222 (2017)

    2017

  62. [62]

    Vertu, J.-J

    S. Vertu, J.-J. Delaunay, I. Yamada, and O. Haeberl´ e, Diffraction microtomography with sample rotation: in- fluence of a missing apple core in the recorded frequency space, Cent. Eur. J. Phys.7, 22 (2009)

    2009

  63. [63]

    J. Lim, K. Lee, K. H. Jin, S. Shin, S. Lee, Y. Park, and J. C. Ye, Comparative study of iterative reconstruction algorithms for missing cone problems in optical diffraction tomography, Opt. Express23, 16933 (2015)

    2015

  64. [64]

    Pospelov, W

    G. Pospelov, W. Van Herck, J. Burle, J. M. Car- mona Loaiza, C. Durniak, J. M. Fisher, M. Ganeva, D. Yurov, and J. Wuttke, Bornagain: software for simu- lating and fitting grazing-incidence small-angle scattering, J. Appl. Crystallogr.53, 262 (2020). 35

    2020

  65. [65]

    R. P. Kurta, J. J. Donatelli, C. H. Yoon, P. Berntsen, J. Bielecki, B. J. Daurer, H. DeMirci, P. Fromme, M. F. Hantke, F. R. Maia,et al., Correlations in scattered X-ray laser pulses reveal nanoscale structural features of viruses, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 158102 (2017)

    2017

  66. [66]

    Pande, J

    K. Pande, J. J. Donatelli, E. Malmerberg, L. Foucar, C. Bostedt, I. Schlichting, and P. H. Zwart, Ab initio structure determination from experimental fluctuation X-ray scattering data, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.115, 11772 (2018)

    2018

  67. [67]

    J. P. Chen and R. A. Kirian, Phase retrieval in the pres- ence of multiplicative noise, inUnconventional and In- direct Imaging, Image Reconstruction, and Wavefront Sensing 2017, Vol. 10410 (SPIE, 2017) pp. 140–144

    2017

  68. [68]

    Pande, J

    K. Pande, J. Donatelli, D. Parkinson, H. Yan, and J. Sethian, Joint iterative reconstruction and 3D rigid alignment for X-ray tomography, Opt. Express30, 8898 (2022)

    2022

  69. [69]

    C. Yang, E. G. Ng, and P. A. Penczek, Unified 3-D struc- ture and projection orientation refinement using quasi- Newton algorithm, J. Struct. Biol.149, 53 (2005)

    2005

  70. [70]

    Ramos, J

    T. Ramos, J. S. Jørgensen, and J. W. Andreasen, Auto- mated angular and translational tomographic alignment and application to phase-contrast imaging, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A34, 1830 (2017)

    2017

  71. [71]

    H. Yu, S. Xia, C. Wei, Y. Mao, D. Larsson, X. Xiao, P. Pianetta, Y.-S. Yu, and Y. Liu, Automatic projec- tion image registration for nanoscale X-ray tomographic reconstruction, J. Synchrotron Radiat.25, 1819 (2018)

    2018

  72. [72]

    L´ erondel and R

    G. L´ erondel and R. Romestain, Fresnel coefficients of a rough interface, Appl. Phys. Lett.74, 2740 (1999). 36 FIG. 20. Ground truth and reconstructions of the porous medium from staggered CSSI intensity grid data. For each example, the top two rows display different orientations of the density isosurfaces at ρ = 0.5 for test cases 1, 2, 3, and 5 and ρ =...

    1999

  73. [73]

    Pospelov, W

    G. Pospelov, W. Van Herck, J. Burle, J. M. Carmona Loaiza, C. Durniak, J. M. Fisher, M. Ganeva, D. Yurov, and J. Wuttke, Bornagain: software for simulating and fitting grazing- incidence small-angle scattering, J. Appl. Crystallogr.53, 262 (2020). 22

    2020