Choice of training label matters: how to best use deep learning for quantitative MRI parameter estimation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Deep learning (DL) is gaining popularity as a parameter estimation method for quantitative MRI. A range of competing implementations have been proposed, relying on either supervised or self-supervised learning. Self-supervised approaches, sometimes referred to as unsupervised, have been loosely based on auto-encoders, whereas supervised methods have, to date, been trained on groundtruth labels. These two learning paradigms have been shown to have distinct strengths. Notably, self-supervised approaches have offered lower-bias parameter estimates than their supervised alternatives. This result is counterintuitive - incorporating prior knowledge with supervised labels should, in theory, lead to improved accuracy. In this work, we show that this apparent limitation of supervised approaches stems from the naive choice of groundtruth training labels. By training on labels which are deliberately not groundtruth, we show that the low-bias parameter estimation previously associated with self-supervised methods can be replicated - and improved on - within a supervised learning framework. This approach sets the stage for a single, unifying, deep learning parameter estimation framework, based on supervised learning, where trade-offs between bias and variance are made by careful adjustment of training label.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 May 2022.
Builds on
5 of 24 references.
References · 5
- 2015Fast and Accurate Deep Network Learning by Exponential Linear Units (ELUs)cited by 1,061
- 2018Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping using Deep Neural Network: QSMnetcited by 24
- 2020Improved unsupervised physics-informed deep learning for intravoxel incoherent motion modeling and evaluation in pancreatic cancer patientscited by 16
- 2020Model-Informed Machine Learning for Multi-component T2 Relaxometrycited by 5
- 2021Task-driven assessment of experimental designs in diffusion MRI: a computational frameworkcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 2; 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
8 papers.
- 2024Diffusion MRI with Machine Learningcited by 11
- 2023Rician likelihood loss for quantitative MRI using self-supervised deep learningcited by 4
- 2023ssVERDICT: Self-Supervised VERDICT-MRI for Enhanced Prostate Tumour Characterisationcited by 4
- 2022Fitting a Directional Microstructure Model to Diffusion-Relaxation MRI Data with Self-Supervised Machine Learningcited by 2
- 2024MRI Parameter Mapping via Gaussian Mixture VAE: Breaking the Assumption of Independent Pixelscited by 1
- 2025Ultra-Strong Gradient Diffusion MRI with Self-Supervised Learning for Prostate Cancer Characterizationcited by 0
- 2026Realistic noise synthesis reduces bias and improves tissue microstructure estimation with supervised machine learningcited by 0
- 2026Eddeep: a deep-learning framework for fast eddy-current distortion correction in diffusion MRIcited by 0
- 2026Eddeep: a deep-learning framework for fast eddy-current distortion correction in diffusion MRI28 Jul 2026
- 2026Realistic noise synthesis reduces bias and improves tissue microstructure estimation with supervised machine learning1 Jun 2026
- 2025Ultra-Strong Gradient Diffusion MRI with Self-Supervised Learning for Prostate Cancer Characterization2 Dec 2025
- 2024MRI Parameter Mapping via Gaussian Mixture VAE: Breaking the Assumption of Independent Pixels16 Nov 2024
- 2024Diffusion MRI with Machine Learning1 Jan 2024
- 2023ssVERDICT: Self-Supervised VERDICT-MRI for Enhanced Prostate Tumour Characterisation12 Sep 2023
- 2023Rician likelihood loss for quantitative MRI using self-supervised deep learning13 Jul 2023
- 2022Fitting a Directional Microstructure Model to Diffusion-Relaxation MRI Data with Self-Supervised Machine Learning5 Oct 2022