Public

Muon Tomo — Public Tier

(3 scenes)

Full-access development tier with all data visible.

Measurements (y), ideal forward operator (H), spec ranges, ground truth (x_true), and true mismatch spec.

Load HDF5 → compare reconstruction vs x_true → check consistency → iterate.

Reconstructed signals (x_hat) and corrected spec as HDF5.

✓

True spec visible — use these exact values for Scenario III oracle reconstruction.

Parameter	Spec Range	True Value	Unit
angular_resolution	-2.0 – 4.0	1.0	mrad
momentum_estimate	-10.0 – 20.0	5.0	%
detector_efficiency	-3.0 – 6.0	1.5	%

Method: CPU_baseline — Mismatch parameter: nominal

17.61 dB

SSIM 0.3262

13.04 dB

SSIM 0.0468

16.34 dB

SSIM 0.1224

Per-scene breakdown (4 scenes)

Scene	PSNR I	SSIM I	PSNR II	SSIM II	PSNR III	SSIM III
scene_00	16.58	0.3251	12.51	0.0447	15.93	0.1214
scene_01	18.88	0.3252	13.74	0.0480	17.02	0.1162
scene_02	18.30	0.3298	13.37	0.0496	16.55	0.1259
scene_03	16.68	0.3248	12.53	0.0450	15.85	0.1262

#	Method	Score	PSNR	SSIM	Consistency	Trust	Source
1	PETFormer + gradient	0.805	33.42	0.956	0.94	✓ Certified	Li et al., ECCV 2024
2	DeepPET + gradient	0.768	30.82	0.929	0.94	✓ Certified	Haggstrom et al., MIA 2019
3	TransEM + gradient	0.767	31.72	0.94	0.87	✓ Certified	Xie et al., 2023
4	PET-ViT + gradient	0.750	30.59	0.925	0.87	✓ Certified	Smith et al., ICCV 2024
5	MAPEM-RDP + gradient	0.706	27.48	0.869	0.92	✓ Certified	Nuyts et al., IEEE TMI 2002
6	U-Net-PET + gradient	0.700	27.47	0.869	0.89	✓ Certified	Ronneberger et al. variant, MICCAI 2020
7	ML-EM + gradient	0.631	24.16	0.774	0.9	✓ Certified	Shepp & Vardi, IEEE TPAMI 1982
8	FBP-PET + gradient	0.619	23.97	0.767	0.86	✓ Certified	Analytical baseline
9	OSEM + gradient	0.619	23.41	0.747	0.93	✓ Certified	Hudson & Larkin, IEEE TMI 1994
10	OS-EM + gradient	0.559	21.46	0.666	0.89	✓ Certified	Hudson & Larkin, IEEE TMI 1994

y H_ideal spec_ranges x_true true_spec

Format: HDF5

Scenes: 3

0.4 × PSNR_norm + 0.4 × SSIM + 0.2 × (1 − ‖y − Ĥx̂‖/‖y‖)

PSNR: 40% SSIM: 40% Consistency: 20%