# Do Bayesian imaging methods report trustworthy probabilities?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.08179 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.08179/

## Key facts

- Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Inverse problems and image restoration, one of 14 directions in Diffusion models.
- Builds on 17 of its 38 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 May 2024.

## Placed in

- Diffusion models / [Inverse problems and image restoration](https://mlsanity.com/diffusion/inverse-problems-and-image-restoration/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 17 of 17)

- [Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.11239/) (2020)
- [Diffusion Posterior Sampling for General Noisy Inverse Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.14687/) (2022)
- [Denoising Diffusion Restoration Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11793/) (2022)
- [Denoising Diffusion Models for Plug-and-Play Image Restoration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.08995/) (2023)
- [Deep Learning Techniques for Inverse Problems in Imaging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.06001/) (2020)
- [Plug-and-Play Methods Provably Converge with Properly Trained Denoisers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.05406/) (2019)
- [Bayesian imaging using Plug & Play priors: when Langevin meets Tweedie](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.04715/) (2021)
- [Efficient Bayesian computation by proximal Markov chain Monte Carlo: when Langevin meets Moreau](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1612.07471/) (2016)
- [Learned reconstruction methods with convergence guarantees](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.05431/) (2022)
- [A Neural-Network-Based Convex Regularizer for Inverse Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12461/) (2022)
- [Fast Diffusion EM: a diffusion model for blind inverse problems with application to deconvolution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00287/) (2023)
- [Imaging with Equivariant Deep Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.01725/) (2022)
- [Solving Inverse Problems by Joint Posterior Maximization with Autoencoding Prior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.01648/) (2021)
- [Bayesian Imaging With Data-Driven Priors Encoded by Neural Networks: Theory, Methods, and Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.10182/) (2021)
- [Scalable Bayesian uncertainty quantification in imaging inverse problems via convex optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.00889/) (2018)
- [Equivariant Bootstrapping for Uncertainty Quantification in Imaging Inverse Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11838/) (2023)
- [Scalable Bayesian uncertainty quantification with data-driven priors for radio interferometric imaging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.00125/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [Reconstruct Anything Model: a lightweight general model for computational imaging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.08915/) (2025)
- [A Stability Benchmark of Generative Regularizers for Inverse Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.10076/) (2026)
- [Self-supervised conformal prediction for uncertainty quantification in Poisson imaging problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.19194/) (2025)
- [Hypothesis Testing in Imaging Inverse Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22481/) (2025)
- [Exact Evaluation of the Accuracy of Diffusion Models for Inverse Problems with Gaussian Data Distributions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.07008/) (2025)
- [Priors learned from legacy reconstructions inherit undetectable overconfidence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.21721/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Bayesian statistics is a cornerstone of imaging sciences, underpinning many and varied approaches from Markov random fields to score-based denoising diffusion models. In addition to powerful image estimation methods, the Bayesian paradigm also provides a framework for uncertainty quantification and for using image data as quantitative evidence. These probabilistic capabilities are important for the rigorous interpretation of experimental results and for robust interfacing of quantitative imaging pipelines with scientific and decision-making processes. However, are the probabilities delivered by existing Bayesian imaging methods meaningful under replication of an experiment, or are they only meaningful as subjective measures of belief? This paper presents a Monte Carlo method to explore this question. We then leverage the proposed Monte Carlo method and run a large experiment requiring 1,000 GPU-hours to probe the accuracy of five canonical Bayesian imaging methods that are representative of some of the main Bayesian imaging strategies from the past decades (a score-based denoising diffusion technique, a plug-and-play Langevin algorithm utilising a Lipschitz-regularised DnCNN denoiser, a Bayesian method with a dictionary-based prior trained subject to a log-concavity constraint, an empirical Bayesian method with a total-variation prior, and a hierarchical Bayesian Gibbs sampler based on a Gaussian Markov random field model). We find that, a few cases, the probabilities reported by modern Bayesian imaging techniques are in broad agreement with long-term averages as observed over a large number of replication of an experiment, but existing Bayesian imaging methods are generally not able to deliver reliable uncertainty quantification results.