mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Validation and Generalizability of Self-Supervised Image Reconstruction Methods for Undersampled MRI

arXiv 2201.12535 ↗First posted 29 Jan 2022eess.IV cs.AI physics.med-phcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Deep learning methods have become the state of the art for undersampled MR reconstruction. Particularly for cases where it is infeasible or impossible for ground truth, fully sampled data to be acquired, self-supervised machine learning methods for reconstruction are becoming increasingly used. However potential issues in the validation of such methods, as well as their generalizability, remain underexplored. In this paper, we investigate important aspects of the validation of self-supervised algorithms for reconstruction of undersampled MR images: quantitative evaluation of prospective reconstructions, potential differences between prospective and retrospective reconstructions, suitability of commonly used quantitative metrics, and generalizability. Two self-supervised algorithms based on self-supervised denoising and the deep image prior were investigated. These methods are compared to a least squares fitting and a compressed sensing reconstruction using in-vivo and phantom data. Their generalizability was tested with prospectively under-sampled data from experimental conditions different to the training. We show that prospective reconstructions can exhibit significant distortion relative to retrospective reconstructions/ground truth. Furthermore, pixel-wise quantitative metrics may not capture differences in perceptual quality accurately, in contrast to a perceptual metric. In addition, all methods showed potential for generalization; however, generalizability is more affected by changes in anatomy/contrast than other changes. We further showed that no-reference image metrics correspond well with human rating of image quality for studying generalizability. Finally, we showed that a well-tuned compressed sensing reconstruction and learned denoising perform similarly on all data.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jan 2022.

Builds on

17 of 52 references.

References · 17

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  2. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
  3. 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,604
  4. 2016Perceptual Losses for Real-Time Style Transfer and Super-Resolutioncited by 2,678
  5. 2017Deep Image Priorcited by 1,097
  6. 2017The Perception-Distortion Tradeoffcited by 582
  7. 2017Learning a Variational Network for Reconstruction of Accelerated MRI Datacited by 340
  8. 2019Noise2Self: Blind Denoising by Self-Supervisioncited by 274
  9. 2019On instabilities of deep learning in image reconstruction - Does AI come at a cost?cited by 211
  10. 2018Deep Decoder: Concise Image Representations from Untrained Non-convolutional Networkscited by 120
  11. 2020NTIRE 2020 Challenge on Real-World Image Super-Resolution: Methods and Resultscited by 83
  12. 2019Deep Learning Methods for Parallel Magnetic Resonance Image Reconstructioncited by 81
5 more
  1. 2021Unsupervised MRI Reconstruction via Zero-Shot Learned Adversarial Transformerscited by 76
  2. 2019RARE: Image Reconstruction using Deep Priors Learned without Ground Truthcited by 64
  3. 2021Measuring Robustness in Deep Learning Based Compressive Sensingcited by 53
  4. 2020Compressive sensing with un-trained neural networks: Gradient descent finds the smoothest approximationcited by 39
  5. 2021fastMRI+: Clinical Pathology Annotations for Knee and Brain Fully Sampled Multi-Coil MRI Datacited by 29

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 2; 2024: 0; 2025: 2.

6 papers.