2018
DOI: 10.1109/tmi.2018.2799231
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learned Primal-Dual Reconstruction

Abstract: We propose the Learned Primal-Dual algorithm for tomographic reconstruction. The algorithm accounts for a (possibly non-linear) forward operator in a deep neural network by unrolling a proximal primal-dual optimization method, but where the proximal operators have been replaced with convolutional neural networks. The algorithm is trained end-to-end, working directly from raw measured data and it does not depend on any initial reconstruction such as filtered back-projection (FBP). We compare performance of the … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
718
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 740 publications
(720 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
2
718
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A conventional BM3D denoiser also proved to be effective in jumpstarting SMS‐NEATR, but the performance was consistently better using a learned denoiser tailored for the specific application (Figure and Supporting Information Figures S3 and S4). We anticipate further gains from advanced models that could simultaneously enforce data consistency and perform learned filtering . This would also streamline the SMS‐NEATR pipeline and reduce the number of steps.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A conventional BM3D denoiser also proved to be effective in jumpstarting SMS‐NEATR, but the performance was consistently better using a learned denoiser tailored for the specific application (Figure and Supporting Information Figures S3 and S4). We anticipate further gains from advanced models that could simultaneously enforce data consistency and perform learned filtering . This would also streamline the SMS‐NEATR pipeline and reduce the number of steps.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These ideas treat the iterations in gradient‐descent–type reconstructions as unrolled networks to retain fidelity to acquired data through a forward model, while learning model parameters that map the reconstruction to a reference image . Importantly, such combination of a forward model and learned filtering provided further improvement than a model‐based reconstruction followed by U‐Net denoising …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We demonstrate how ML can be effectively incorporated into retrospective motion correction approaches based on data consistency error minimization. Other works have balanced data consistency error with ML generated image priors (created using variational networks) to dramatically reduce reconstruction times and improve image quality for highly accelerated acquisitions . Here, we demonstrate the effective use of ML to guide each step in an iterative model‐based retrospective motion correction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Recently, deep learning approaches have demonstrated impressive performance improvement over conventional iterative methods for low-dose CT [9][10][11] and sparse-view CT. [12][13][14][15] The main advantage of deep learning approach over the conventional MBIR approaches is that the network learns the image statistics in a fully data-driven way rather than using hand-tuned regularizations. While these approaches usually take time for training, real-time reconstruction is possible once the network is trained, making the algorithm very practical in the clinical setting.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%