Adversarial Robust Training of Deep Learning MRI Reconstruction Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep Learning (DL) has shown potential in accelerating Magnetic Resonance Image acquisition and reconstruction. Nevertheless, there is a dearth of tailored methods to guarantee that the reconstruction of small features is achieved with high fidelity. In this work, we employ adversarial attacks to generate small synthetic perturbations, which are difficult to reconstruct for a trained DL reconstruction network. Then, we use robust training to increase the network’s sensitivity to these small features and encourage their reconstruction. Next, we investigate the generalization of said approach to real world features. For this, a musculoskeletal radiologist annotated a set of cartilage and meniscal lesions from the knee Fast-MRI dataset, and a classification network was devised to assess the reconstruction of the features. Experimental results show that by introducing robust training to a reconstruction network, the rate of false negative features (4.8%) in image reconstruction can be reduced. These results are encouraging, and highlight the necessity for attention to this problem by the image reconstruction community, as a milestone for the introduction of DL reconstruction in clinical practice. To support further research, we make our annotations and code publicly available at https://github.com/fcaliva/fastMRI_BB_abnormalities_annotation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".