Dev
Focused Ion Beam SEM (FIB-SEM) — Dev Tier
(3 scenes)Blind evaluation tier — no ground truth available.
What you get
Measurements (y), ideal forward operator (H), and spec ranges only.
How to use
Apply your pipeline from the Public tier. Use consistency as self-check.
What to submit
Reconstructed signals and corrected spec. Scored server-side.
Parameter Specifications
🔒
True spec hidden — estimate parameters from spec ranges below.
| Parameter | Spec Range | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| slice_thickness_variation | -3.6 – 5.4 | - |
| curtaining_artifact | -0.072 – 0.108 | relative |
| charging | -72.0 – 108.0 | V |
| drift_between_slices | -1.2 – 1.8 | nm |
Dev Tier Leaderboard
| # | Method | Score | PSNR | SSIM | Consistency | Trust | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PhysFIB + gradient | 0.779 | 33.01 | 0.953 | 0.84 | ✓ Certified | Chen et al., Nat. Commun. 2024 |
| 2 | SwinFIB + gradient | 0.778 | 33.07 | 0.953 | 0.83 | ✓ Certified | Wang et al., Nat. Commun. 2023 |
| 3 | DiffFIB + gradient | 0.773 | 31.86 | 0.941 | 0.89 | ✓ Certified | Gao et al., NeurIPS 2024 |
| 4 | TransFIB + gradient | 0.749 | 31.15 | 0.933 | 0.82 | ✓ Certified | Li et al., Nat. Methods 2022 |
| 5 | DnCNN-FIB + gradient | 0.635 | 24.41 | 0.783 | 0.89 | ✓ Certified | Buchholz et al., Nat. Methods 2019 |
| 6 | BM3D-FIB + gradient | 0.622 | 24.19 | 0.775 | 0.85 | ✓ Certified | Dabov et al., IEEE TIP 2007 |
| 7 | N2V-FIB + gradient | 0.608 | 23.22 | 0.74 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Krull et al., NeurIPS 2019 |
| 8 | NLM-FIB + gradient | 0.590 | 23.32 | 0.743 | 0.8 | ✓ Certified | Buades et al., CVPR 2005 |
| 9 | TV-FIB + gradient | 0.576 | 22.31 | 0.703 | 0.86 | ✓ Certified | Rudin et al., Physica D 1992 |
Visible Data Fields
y
H_ideal
spec_ranges
Dataset
Format: HDF5
Scenes: 3
Scoring Formula
0.4 × PSNR_norm + 0.4 × SSIM + 0.2 × (1 − ‖y − Ĥx̂‖/‖y‖)
PSNR: 40%
SSIM: 40%
Consistency: 20%