mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Understanding Benefits and Pitfalls of Current Methods for the Segmentation of Undersampled MRI Data

arXiv 2508.18975 ↗First posted 26 Aug 2025eess.IV cs.CVcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

MR imaging is a valuable diagnostic tool allowing to non-invasively visualize patient anatomy and pathology with high soft-tissue contrast. However, MRI acquisition is typically time-consuming, leading to patient discomfort and increased costs to the healthcare system. Recent years have seen substantial research effort into the development of methods that allow for accelerated MRI acquisition while still obtaining a reconstruction that appears similar to the fully-sampled MR image. However, for many applications a perfectly reconstructed MR image may not be necessary, particularly, when the primary goal is a downstream task such as segmentation. This has led to growing interest in methods that aim to perform segmentation directly on accelerated MRI data. Despite recent advances, existing methods have largely been developed in isolation, without direct comparison to one another, often using separate or private datasets, and lacking unified evaluation standards. To date, no high-quality, comprehensive comparison of these methods exists, and the optimal strategy for segmenting accelerated MR data remains unknown. This paper provides the first unified benchmark for the segmentation of undersampled MRI data comparing 7 approaches. A particular focus is placed on comparing textitone-stage approaches, that combine reconstruction and segmentation into a unified model, with textittwo-stage approaches, that utilize established MRI reconstruction methods followed by a segmentation network. We test these methods on two MRI datasets that include multi-coil k-space data as well as a human-annotated segmentation ground-truth. We find that simple two-stage methods that consider data-consistency lead to the best segmentation scores, surpassing complex specialized methods that are developed specifically for this task.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Aug 2025.

Builds on

11 of 38 references.

References · 11

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  2. 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,713
  3. 2022MONAI: An open-source framework for deep learning in healthcarecited by 448
  4. 2017Deep learning for undersampled MRI reconstructioncited by 91
  5. 2018Why rankings of biomedical image analysis competitions should be interpreted with carecited by 91
  6. 2019Methods and open-source toolkit for analyzing and visualizing challenge resultscited by 60
  7. 2022SKM-TEA: A Dataset for Accelerated MRI Reconstruction with Dense Image Labels for Quantitative Clinical Evaluationcited by 44
  8. 2017Unrolled Optimization with Deep Priorscited by 40
  9. 2018Joint CS-MRI Reconstruction and Segmentation with a Unified Deep Networkcited by 21
  10. 2024Deep Learning for Accelerated and Robust MRI Reconstruction: a Reviewcited by 9
  11. 2024Segmentation-guided MRI reconstruction for meaningfully diverse reconstructionscited by 6

Built on by

Not cited yet.