Public
Portal Imaging (EPID) — 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| isocenter_shift | -0.4 – 0.8 | 0.2 | mm |
| beam_energy_variation | 5.96 – 6.08 | 6.02 | MV |
| detector_sag | -0.2 – 0.4 | 0.1 | mm |
| scatter_kernel_width | 4.6 – 5.8 | 5.2 | mm |
InverseNet Baseline Scores
Method: CPU_baseline — Mismatch parameter: nominal
Scenario I (Ideal)
14.88 dB
SSIM 0.2885
Scenario II (Mismatch)
11.40 dB
SSIM 0.0410
Scenario III (Oracle)
14.64 dB
SSIM 0.1177
Per-scene breakdown (4 scenes)
| Scene | PSNR I | SSIM I | PSNR II | SSIM II | PSNR III | SSIM III |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| scene_00 | 14.80 | 0.2898 | 11.38 | 0.0400 | 14.58 | 0.1169 |
| scene_01 | 15.05 | 0.2857 | 11.41 | 0.0409 | 14.66 | 0.1169 |
| scene_02 | 14.99 | 0.2846 | 11.40 | 0.0427 | 14.66 | 0.1192 |
| scene_03 | 14.69 | 0.2938 | 11.40 | 0.0405 | 14.65 | 0.1180 |
Public Tier Leaderboard
| # | Method | Score | PSNR | SSIM | Consistency | Trust | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Score-CT + gradient | 0.865 | 38.22 | 0.983 | 0.95 | ✓ Certified | Song et al., NeurIPS 2024 |
| 2 | CT-ViT + gradient | 0.857 | 37.86 | 0.982 | 0.93 | ✓ Certified | Guo et al., NeurIPS 2024 |
| 3 | DiffusionCT + gradient | 0.844 | 37.8 | 0.981 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Kazemi et al., ECCV 2024 |
| 4 | CTFormer + gradient | 0.839 | 36.63 | 0.976 | 0.91 | ✓ Certified | Li et al., ICCV 2024 |
| 5 | DOLCE + gradient | 0.828 | 36.42 | 0.975 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Liu et al., ICCV 2023 |
| 6 | Learned Primal-Dual + gradient | 0.824 | 34.93 | 0.967 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | Adler & Oktem, IEEE TMI 2018 |
| 7 | DuDoTrans + gradient | 0.820 | 35.73 | 0.972 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Wang et al., MLMIR 2022 |
| 8 | FBPConvNet + gradient | 0.795 | 33.43 | 0.956 | 0.89 | ✓ Certified | Jin et al., IEEE TIP 2017 |
| 9 | PnP-DnCNN + gradient | 0.787 | 32.4 | 0.947 | 0.92 | ✓ Certified | Zhang et al., IEEE TIP 2017 |
| 10 | PnP-ADMM + gradient | 0.770 | 30.89 | 0.929 | 0.95 | ✓ Certified | Venkatakrishnan et al., IEEE GlobalSIP 2013 |
| 11 | RED-CNN + gradient | 0.763 | 31.34 | 0.935 | 0.88 | ✓ Certified | Chen et al., IEEE TMI 2017 |
| 12 | TV-ADMM + gradient | 0.730 | 28.53 | 0.891 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | Sidky et al., Phys. Med. Biol. 2008 |
| 13 | FBP + gradient | 0.644 | 24.7 | 0.792 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Kak & Slaney, IEEE Press 1988 |
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%