Public
Widefield — Public Tier
(5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| psf_sigma | -10.0 – 20.0 | 5.0 | % |
| defocus | -0.5 – 1.0 | 0.25 | μm |
| background | -50.0 – 100.0 | 25.0 |
InverseNet Baseline Scores
Method: CPU_baseline — Mismatch parameter: nominal
Scenario I (Ideal)
28.76 dB
SSIM 0.8191
Scenario II (Mismatch)
23.41 dB
SSIM 0.5268
Scenario III (Oracle)
7.23 dB
SSIM 0.0107
Per-scene breakdown (4 scenes)
| Scene | PSNR I | SSIM I | PSNR II | SSIM II | PSNR III | SSIM III |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| scene_00 | 24.90 | 0.8560 | 21.08 | 0.7343 | 8.80 | 0.0149 |
| scene_01 | 30.17 | 0.7563 | 23.36 | 0.3394 | 8.75 | 0.0099 |
| scene_02 | 32.75 | 0.8090 | 25.73 | 0.3127 | 5.44 | 0.0063 |
| scene_03 | 27.21 | 0.8553 | 23.48 | 0.7210 | 5.93 | 0.0117 |
Public Tier Leaderboard
| # | Method | Score | PSNR | SSIM | Consistency | Trust | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Restormer+ + gradient | 0.838 | 36.03 | 0.974 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | Zamir et al., ICCV 2024 |
| 2 | DeconvFormer + gradient | 0.835 | 35.81 | 0.972 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | Chen et al., CVPR 2024 |
| 3 | ScoreMicro + gradient | 0.828 | 35.83 | 0.973 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Wei et al., ECCV 2025 |
| 4 | DiffDeconv + gradient | 0.822 | 35.39 | 0.97 | 0.9 | ✓ Certified | Huang et al., NeurIPS 2024 |
| 5 | Restormer + gradient | 0.816 | 34.47 | 0.964 | 0.93 | ✓ Certified | Zamir et al., CVPR 2022 |
| 6 | ResUNet + gradient | 0.816 | 34.28 | 0.963 | 0.94 | ✓ Certified | DeCelle et al., Nat. Methods 2021 |
| 7 | U-Net + gradient | 0.784 | 32.62 | 0.949 | 0.89 | ✓ Certified | Ronneberger et al., MICCAI 2015 |
| 8 | CARE + gradient | 0.773 | 31.58 | 0.938 | 0.91 | ✓ Certified | Weigert et al., Nat. Methods 2018 |
| 9 | PnP-DnCNN + gradient | 0.752 | 29.94 | 0.916 | 0.93 | ✓ Certified | Zhang et al., IEEE TIP 2017 |
| 10 | PnP-FISTA + gradient | 0.736 | 28.76 | 0.896 | 0.95 | ✓ Certified | Bai et al., 2020 |
| 11 | TV-Deconvolution + gradient | 0.694 | 27.13 | 0.861 | 0.89 | ✓ Certified | Rudin et al., Phys. A 1992 |
| 12 | Wiener Filter + gradient | 0.670 | 26.04 | 0.833 | 0.88 | ✓ Certified | Analytical baseline |
| 13 | Richardson-Lucy + gradient | 0.644 | 24.77 | 0.795 | 0.89 | ✓ Certified | Richardson, JOSA 1972 / Lucy, AJ 1974 |
Visible Data Fields
y
H_ideal
spec_ranges
x_true
true_spec
Dataset
Format: HDF5
Scenes: 5
Scoring Formula
0.4 × PSNR_norm + 0.4 × SSIM + 0.2 × (1 − ‖y − Ĥx̂‖/‖y‖)
PSNR: 40%
SSIM: 40%
Consistency: 20%