Dev
Ghost Imaging — 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 |
|---|---|---|
| bucket_detector_efficiency | 0.82 – 1.12 | - |
| speckle_correlation_mismatch | -2.4 – 3.6 | - |
| background_counts | -1.2 – 1.8 | - |
| number_of_measurements | -11600.0 – 42400.0 | - |
Dev Tier Leaderboard
| # | Method | Score | PSNR | SSIM | Consistency | Trust | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ghost-ViT + gradient | 0.666 | 26.43 | 0.844 | 0.82 | ✓ Certified | Zhu et al., 2025 |
| 2 | Quantum-ViT + gradient | 0.648 | 25.39 | 0.814 | 0.84 | ✓ Certified | Quantum imaging transformer, 2024 |
| 3 | ScoreQuantum + gradient | 0.563 | 22.2 | 0.698 | 0.81 | ✓ Certified | Wei et al., 2025 |
| 4 | Bayesian CS + gradient | 0.546 | 21.5 | 0.668 | 0.82 | ✓ Certified | Bayesian compressed sensing |
| 5 | DRU-Net + gradient | 0.542 | 21.05 | 0.648 | 0.86 | ✓ Certified | Wang et al., Sci. Rep. 2020 |
| 6 | CS-TVAL3 + gradient | 0.535 | 21.18 | 0.654 | 0.81 | ✓ Certified | Li et al., 2014 |
| 7 | Photon Counting + gradient | 0.522 | 20.64 | 0.629 | 0.82 | ✓ Certified | Classical baseline |
| 8 | Quantum-CNN + gradient | 0.509 | 20.18 | 0.607 | 0.82 | ✓ Certified | Quantum imaging CNN |
| 9 | G(2)-Corr + gradient | 0.448 | 18.13 | 0.506 | 0.82 | ✓ Certified | Pittman et al., PRA 1995 |
| 10 | DiffusionQuantum + gradient | 0.387 | 15.67 | 0.386 | 0.88 | ✓ Certified | Zhang et al., 2024 |
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%