Figure displays the average image from the selected 55 channels of the Cu XRD (111) peak, highlighting a region of interest. Supplementary Figure illustrates two more regions. Both Figure and S12 depict the average XRD peaks from the marked regions. As illustrated in these figures, ParallaxNet can accurately reconstruct the Cu peak, producing a significantly sharper peak. The peak positions align with the XRD-CT data reconstructed by the FBP from the full 360 °scan. This result shows that the ParallaxNet correctly removed both the peak shifting and broadening artefacts caused by the Parallax on this Cu XRD peak. It is important to note here that the centers of the peaks obtained from the FBP 360 °scan align with those of the ParallaxNet-reconstructed peaks. However, it becomes evident that the peak shape cannot be effectively described using a single peak shape model. This observation is distinctly apparent across all peaks illustrated in Supplementary Figure , with a particularly noticeable manifestation in the Cu diffraction peak from Figure . This observation bears significance, as attempting to fit these peaks using a single model, such as Gaussian or pseudo-Voigt models-commonly employed in XRD data analysis-can potentially yield inaccurate data interpretations. Such an approach might result in artificial shifts of the peaks, given that the employed model does not adequately capture the intricacies of the data's true behavior. This is especially crucial when high precision is required for the calculated lattice parameter values, e.g. in the order of <10 -3 Å such as when attempting to capture shifts in the Cu peak introduced by temperature gradients in these battery systems .