Public
Susceptibility-Weighted Imaging (SWI) — 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| phase_unwrapping_error | -1.0 – 2.0 | 0.5 | - |
| background_field_removal_error | -2.0 – 4.0 | 1.0 | - |
| dipole_inversion_regularization | -0.15 – 0.15 | 0.0 | - |
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 | SwinMR++ + gradient | 0.908 | 42.11 | 0.992 | 0.95 | ✓ Certified | Huang et al., IEEE TMI 2025 — multi-scale axial attention + INR head + k-space DC per module + LPIPS+SSIM+k-space joint loss + dynamic feature fusion |
| 2 | HUMUS-Net++ + gradient | 0.901 | 41.61 | 0.991 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | Fabian et al., dHUMUS-Net 2023 — k-space DC per module + dynamic multi-scale weighting + INR head + perceptual-structural loss + axial attention |
| 3 | HybridCascade++ + gradient | 0.895 | 41.46 | 0.991 | 0.92 | ✓ Certified | HybridCascade++ MICCAI 2021 + IEEE TMI 2025 — multi-scale cascade DC + SIREN INR warm-start + SSIM structural anchor + DRUNet polish + freq-blend LF/HF fusion |
| 4 | MRI-FM + gradient | 0.888 | 40.48 | 0.989 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | Wang et al., Nature MI 2026 |
| 5 | MoDL-Net++ + gradient | 0.886 | 40.06 | 0.988 | 0.95 | ✓ Certified | MoDL-Net++ IEEE TMI 2025 — multi-scale pyramid fusion + RDN/Swin deep prior + differentiable DC layers + LPIPS+SSIM+L1 joint loss + two-stage training strategy |
| 6 | PromptMR-SFM + gradient | 0.881 | 39.82 | 0.987 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | PWM 2026 |
| 7 | MR-IPT + gradient | 0.874 | 40.63 | 0.989 | 0.86 | ✓ Certified | Sci. Reports 2025 |
| 8 | ReconFormer++ + gradient | 0.864 | 39.49 | 0.987 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Pan et al., IEEE TMI 2025 |
| 9 | PromptMR + gradient | 0.863 | 38.2 | 0.983 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | Bai et al., ECCV 2024 |
| 10 | U-Net++ + gradient | 0.861 | 38.58 | 0.984 | 0.91 | ✓ Certified | Chen & Boning, IEEE TMI 2024 (DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2024.3367890) — Residual U-Net + data consistency layers + plug-and-play prior + residual connections + dense skip paths |
| 11 | BrainID-MRI + gradient | 0.858 | 38.44 | 0.984 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Liu et al., CVPR 2025 |
| 12 | PnP-DnCNN-Pro + gradient | 0.856 | 38.07 | 0.982 | 0.91 | ✓ Certified | PnP-DnCNN-Pro IEEE TMI 2025 (DOI:10.1109/TMI.2025.3441240) — multi-scale DnCNN denoiser + adaptive mu/sigma schedule + SIREN INR output head + joint LPIPS+SSIM denoiser training + dynamic PnP regularization scheduling |
| 13 | MMR-Mamba + gradient | 0.856 | 38.23 | 0.983 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Zhao et al., Med. Image Anal. 2025 |
| 14 | ReconFormer + gradient | 0.855 | 37.64 | 0.981 | 0.93 | ✓ Certified | Guo et al., IEEE TMI 2024 |
| 15 | HUMUS-Net + gradient | 0.854 | 37.58 | 0.98 | 0.93 | ✓ Certified | Fabian et al., NeurIPS 2022 |
| 16 | MRDynamo + gradient | 0.853 | 38.17 | 0.983 | 0.89 | ✓ Certified | Chen et al., NeurIPS 2024 |
| 17 | SwinMR + gradient | 0.848 | 36.74 | 0.977 | 0.95 | ✓ Certified | Huang et al., MICCAI 2022 |
| 18 | MRI-DiffusionNet + gradient | 0.848 | 38.09 | 0.982 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Song et al., ICCV 2024 |
| 19 | E2E-VarNet + gradient | 0.841 | 37.63 | 0.981 | 0.86 | ✓ Certified | Sriram et al., MICCAI 2020 |
| 20 | MoDL + gradient | 0.826 | 35.42 | 0.97 | 0.92 | ✓ Certified | Aggarwal et al., IEEE TMI 2019 |
| 21 | HybridCascade + gradient | 0.818 | 34.8 | 0.966 | 0.92 | ✓ Certified | Fastmri, arXiv 2020 |
| 22 | U-Net + gradient | 0.817 | 34.17 | 0.962 | 0.95 | ✓ Certified | Zbontar et al., arXiv 2018 |
| 23 | PnP-DnCNN + gradient | 0.808 | 33.96 | 0.961 | 0.92 | ✓ Certified | Ahmad et al., IEEE TCI 2019 (DOI:10.1109/TCI.2019.2944521) |
| 24 | Deep-ADMM-Net + gradient | 0.791 | 33.41 | 0.956 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Yang et al., NeurIPS 2016 |
| 25 | DCCNN + gradient | 0.786 | 32.52 | 0.948 | 0.91 | ✓ Certified | Schlemper et al., IEEE TMI 2018 |
| 26 | ALOHA + gradient | 0.775 | 31.85 | 0.941 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Jin et al., IEEE TMI 2016 |
| 27 | BM3D-MRI + gradient | 0.770 | 31.5 | 0.937 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Eksioglu, Comput. Math. Meth. Med. 2016 |
| 28 | k-t SPARSE-SENSE + gradient | 0.769 | 30.92 | 0.93 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | Lustig et al., MRM 2006 |
| 29 | LORAKS + gradient | 0.763 | 30.81 | 0.928 | 0.92 | ✓ Certified | Haldar, IEEE TMI 2014 |
| 30 | ESPIRiT + gradient | 0.762 | 31.24 | 0.934 | 0.88 | ✓ Certified | Uecker et al., MRM 2014 |
| 31 | L1-Wavelet + gradient | 0.743 | 30.17 | 0.919 | 0.87 | ✓ Certified | Lustig et al., MRM 2007 |
| 32 | Score-MRI + gradient | 0.730 | 29.21 | 0.904 | 0.88 | ✓ Certified | Chung & Ye, Med. Image Anal. 2022 |
| 33 | GRAPPA + gradient | 0.726 | 28.87 | 0.898 | 0.89 | ✓ Certified | Griswold et al., MRM 2002 |
| 34 | SENSE + gradient | 0.688 | 26.76 | 0.852 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Pruessmann et al., MRM 1999 |
| 35 | Zero-Filled IFFT + gradient | 0.620 | 23.87 | 0.764 | 0.88 | ✓ Certified | Pruessmann et al., MRM 1999 |
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%