arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2203.07809eess.IVcs.CV
收藏

磁共振成像的图像质量评价

Image Quality Assessment for Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Philips Research(飞利浦研究院);Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology(斯科尔科沃科学技术研究院);Eindhoven University of Technology(埃因霍温理工大学)

Segrey Kastryulin, Jamil Zakirov, Nicola Pezzotti, Dmitry V. Dylov

摘要:

图像质量评价(IQA)算法旨在再现人类对图像质量的感知。图像增强、生成和恢复模型的日益普及促使了许多方法的发展,以评估其性能。然而,大多数IQA解决方案被设计用于预测一般领域的图像质量,对于特定领域(如医学成像)的适用性仍然存在疑问。此外,为特定任务选择这些IQA指标通常涉及故意引起的失真,例如手动添加的噪声或人工模糊;然而,所选择的指标随后用于判断现实计算机视觉模型的输出。在这项工作中,我们希望通过开展迄今为止最广泛的磁共振成像(MRI)IQA评估研究(14,700个主观评分)来填补这些空白。我们使用训练的神经网络模型的输出来解决与MRI相关的问题,包括扫描加速中的图像重建、运动校正和去噪。我们的重点是反映放射科医生对重建图像的感知,衡量MRI扫描质量的最具诊断影响力的标准:信噪比,对比度噪声比和伪影的存在。七位训练有素的放射科医生评估这些失真的图像,然后将他们的判决与35种不同的图像质量指标(考虑全参考,无参考和基于分布的指标)相关联。表现最好的-- DISTS、HaarPSI、VSI和FID-VGG 16--在三个拟议的质量标准中,对于所有考虑的解剖结构和目标任务都是有效的。

英文摘要:

Image quality assessment (IQA) algorithms aim to reproduce the human's perception of the image quality. The growing popularity of image enhancement, generation, and recovery models instigated the development of many methods to assess their performance. However, most IQA solutions are designed to predict image quality in the general domain, with the applicability to specific areas, such as medical imaging, remaining questionable. Moreover, the selection of these IQA metrics for a specific task typically involves intentionally induced distortions, such as manually added noise or artificial blurring; yet, the chosen metrics are then used to judge the output of real-life computer vision models. In this work, we aspire to fill these gaps by carrying out the most extensive IQA evaluation study for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) to date (14,700 subjective scores). We use outputs of neural network models trained to solve problems relevant to MRI, including image reconstruction in the scan acceleration, motion correction, and denoising. Our emphasis is on reflecting the radiologist's perception of the reconstructed images, gauging the most diagnostically influential criteria for the quality of MRI scans: signal-to-noise ratio, contrast-to-noise ratio, and the presence of artifacts. Seven trained radiologists assess these distorted images, with their verdicts then correlated with 35 different image quality metrics (full-reference, no-reference, and distribution-based metrics considered). The top performers -- DISTS, HaarPSI, VSI, and FID-VGG16 -- are found to be efficient across three proposed quality criteria, for all considered anatomies and the target tasks.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑