Public
Intravascular Ultrasound (IVUS) — Public Tier
(3 scenes)Full-access development tier with all data visible.
What you get
Measurements (y), ideal forward operator (H), spec ranges, ground truth (x_true), and true mismatch spec.
How to use
Load HDF5 → compare reconstruction vs x_true → check consistency → iterate.
What to submit
Reconstructed signals (x_hat) and corrected spec as HDF5.
Parameter Specifications
✓
True spec visible — use these exact values for Scenario III oracle reconstruction.
| Parameter | Spec Range | True Value | Unit |
|---|---|---|---|
| catheter_rotation_non_uniformity | -2.0 – 4.0 | 1.0 | - |
| ring_down_artifact | -4.0 – 8.0 | 2.0 | - |
| sound_speed_in_plaque | 1508.0 – 1604.0 | 1556.0 | m/s |
InverseNet Baseline Scores
Method: CPU_baseline — Mismatch parameter: nominal
Scenario I (Ideal)
17.61 dB
SSIM 0.3262
Scenario II (Mismatch)
13.39 dB
SSIM 0.0553
Scenario III (Oracle)
16.66 dB
SSIM 0.1359
Per-scene breakdown (4 scenes)
| Scene | PSNR I | SSIM I | PSNR II | SSIM II | PSNR III | SSIM III |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| scene_00 | 16.58 | 0.3251 | 12.85 | 0.0515 | 16.16 | 0.1317 |
| scene_01 | 18.88 | 0.3252 | 14.12 | 0.0562 | 17.37 | 0.1299 |
| scene_02 | 18.30 | 0.3298 | 13.74 | 0.0603 | 16.95 | 0.1425 |
| scene_03 | 16.68 | 0.3248 | 12.85 | 0.0534 | 16.15 | 0.1394 |
Public Tier Leaderboard
| # | Method | Score | PSNR | SSIM | Consistency | Trust | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | UltrasoundFormer + gradient | 0.806 | 33.64 | 0.958 | 0.93 | ✓ Certified | Park et al., CVPR 2024 |
| 2 | DiffUS + gradient | 0.799 | 34.06 | 0.961 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Chen et al., NeurIPS 2024 |
| 3 | ScoreUS + gradient | 0.798 | 33.34 | 0.956 | 0.91 | ✓ Certified | Johnson et al., ECCV 2025 |
| 4 | AttentionBeam + gradient | 0.792 | 33.49 | 0.957 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Xu et al., ECCV 2024 |
| 5 | Phase-ADMM-Net + gradient | 0.790 | 32.33 | 0.946 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | Hou et al., IEEE TMI 2022 |
| 6 | BeamDATA + gradient | 0.789 | 33.25 | 0.955 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Smith et al., ICCV 2024 |
| 7 | BeamFormer + gradient | 0.783 | 32.45 | 0.947 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Li et al., ICCV 2024 |
| 8 | ABLE + gradient | 0.762 | 30.55 | 0.925 | 0.93 | ✓ Certified | Luijten et al., IEEE TMI 2020 |
| 9 | MU-Net + gradient | 0.756 | 30.69 | 0.927 | 0.89 | ✓ Certified | Hyun et al., IEEE TUFFC 2022 |
| 10 | PnP-TV + gradient | 0.753 | 30.3 | 0.921 | 0.91 | ✓ Certified | TV regularization for ultrasound |
| 11 | PnP-ADMM + gradient | 0.697 | 26.98 | 0.858 | 0.92 | ✓ Certified | Goudarzi et al., 2020 |
| 12 | PW-DAS + gradient | 0.622 | 23.95 | 0.767 | 0.88 | ✓ Certified | Plane wave synthesis baseline |
| 13 | DAS-CF + gradient | 0.614 | 23.72 | 0.758 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Capon filter, IEEE 1969 |
| 14 | DAS + gradient | 0.567 | 21.61 | 0.673 | 0.91 | ✓ Certified | Analytical baseline |
Visible Data Fields
y
H_ideal
spec_ranges
x_true
true_spec
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%