UniField: A Unified Field-Aware MRI Enhancement Framework

Chenhui Wang; Yixuan Yuan; Yiyang Lin; Zhihao Peng

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 19 references

UniField: A Unified Field-Aware MRI Enhancement Framework

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-15 · grok-4.5

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read One model unifies MRI field-strength upgrades by sharing degradation patterns and field-specific spectral corrections.

desk verdict Solid multi-task MRI enhancement system with a useful registered multi-center pairing and a field-conditioned spectral loss; headline gains rest on tiny test N and hand-set band weights. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.09223 v2 pith:JV4FXLVN submitted 2026-03-10 cs.CV

Yiyang Lin , Chenhui Wang , Zhihao Peng , Yixuan Yuan This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.CV

keywords MRIfield-strengthenhancementunifiedmulti-tasklearningflowmatchingspectralrectification3Dfoundationmodelspairedmulti-fielddatasetvideopriortransfer

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Upgrading MRI from portable ultra-low field (64 mT) to clinical 3 T, or from 3 T to ultra-high 7 T, is valuable but hard: most methods train separate networks on tiny paired cohorts for one modality and one transition, so they overfit and ignore common degradation structure. UniField trains a single model across T1/T2/FLAIR and both field jumps, treating the problem as shared representation learning. It runs flow matching inside the latent space of a frozen video super-resolution backbone so that 3-D volumes keep continuous anatomy rather than being sliced into independent 2-D images, and it adds a Field-Aware Spectral Rectification Mechanism that reweights frequency bands according to the physics of each transition. The authors also release a multi-center registered paired dataset roughly ten times larger than prior benchmarks. On held-out test splits the unified model beats isolated state-of-the-art baselines by about 1.81 dB PSNR and 9.47 % SSIM on average, with sharper tissue boundaries and fewer hallucinations.

What carries the argument

Field-Aware Spectral Rectification Mechanism (FASRM): a dual-domain loss that partitions the 3-D FFT into low/mid/high bands and applies transition-specific weights (relaxing high-frequency penalties for 64 mT o3 T; suppressing low-frequency weights for 3 T o7 T) so that the flow-matching velocity field is corrected according to the physical character of each magnetic-field jump.

What would settle it

Train the identical architecture with uniform (non-field-aware) spectral weights or with a randomly initialized rather than video-pretrained backbone; if the reported PSNR/SSIM gains and visual recovery of high-frequency detail disappear on the same multi-center test splits, the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

A single network that jointly handles multiple MRI modalities and field-strength transitions, conditioned on a text description of the task and equipped with physics-informed spectral reweighting, learns shared enhancement features more effectively than task-isolated models and recovers high-frequency anatomy that pure flow-matching tends to over-smooth.

Load-bearing premise

That 3-D MRI volumes share enough structure with ordinary video for a frozen video super-resolution encoder-decoder plus light adaptation to supply faithful anatomical priors, and that the hand-chosen frequency weights correctly encode the claimed physics of each field transition.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single deployed model can serve both bedside 64 mT scanners and clinical 3 T-to-7 T upgrades, cutting storage and workflow overhead.
Shared degradation patterns across modalities act as free data augmentation, reducing the paired samples needed per task.
Physics-conditioned spectral reweighting can be reused for other generative MRI tasks that suffer from over-smoothing or artifact memorization.
The released multi-center registered dataset becomes a standard benchmark that future field-enhancement methods must beat.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the video prior transfers cleanly, the same latent-flow recipe may extend to other 3-D medical volumes (CT, PET) that currently rely on 2-D slice processing.
The FASRM weight schedule is essentially a soft physics prior; learning those weights from data rather than hand-setting them could generalize to unlisted field strengths or organs.
Joint multi-task training may also improve robustness to scanner-vendor domain shifts that isolated models never see.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The useful core here is practical: one model that jointly does 64mT o3T and 3T o7T across T1/T2/FLAIR, built on a frozen FlashVSR video prior with LoRA, plus a field-aware frequency reweighting (FASRM) that relaxes high-frequency penalties on extreme LF o HF and down-weights low-frequency bands on 3T o7T to avoid B1-style artifacts. They also register and pool several public paired sets into a larger multi-center corpus and promise release. That combination is new enough as a systems package, even if multi-task enhancement, flow matching, LoRA on SR backbones, and spectral losses each already exist.

What works: the design is coherent with the stated bottlenecks (data scarcity, slice-wise 2D processing, spectral bias). Ablations in Table 4 show unified multi-modality and multi-task training beating per-task models, and the FASRM on/off visuals (Fig. 4) and error maps line up with the claim that the spectral term sharpens anatomy rather than just smoothing. Baselines include the backbone itself, so the gains are not pure circularity. Releasing the registered pairing would be a real service; the field is starved for that.

Soft spots are real but not load-bearing contradictions. Test cohorts after 8:2 splits are tiny (e.g., 2 subjects on Leiden and UNC), with no SDs, CIs, or subject-level tests, so the 1.81 dB / 9.47% average is under-powered and could be sensitive to residual registration or center quirks. FASRM weights ([1,1,0.5] vs [0.5,1,1]) and the λ/α balances are hand-chosen physics-motivated knobs, not learned or swept. The video-prior assumption is plausible for continuous structure but unproven against MRI-specific artifacts. Code/data availability is stated inconsistently between abstract and body. None of that invents a flaw; it just means the numerical headline needs more subjects and uncertainty before you treat it as settled.

This is for people building portable or multi-field MRI pipelines who care about shared degradation and spectral control. It is not a physics rewrite. I would send it to referees: the problem is real, the engineering is clear, the data contribution is valuable if released, and the gaps are fixable with larger hold-outs and stats. Engage if you work in this lane; cite the dataset and the multi-task + FASRM idea once the release is verified.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes UniField, a single flow-matching model that unifies multi-modality (T1/T2/FLAIR) and multi-transition (64mT o3T and 3T o7T) MRI field-strength enhancement. It freezes a FlashVSR video super-resolution encoder/decoder, adapts the backbone with LoRA and sparse attention, and conditions on a UMT5 text prompt that encodes modality and field pair. To counter spectral bias, it introduces FASRM/FASFL (Eq. 2), a field-conditioned spatial-frequency loss that reweights low/mid/high FFT bands differently for the two transitions ([1,1,0.5] vs [0.5,1,1]). The authors also register and release a multi-center paired dataset (Table 1) claimed to be an order of magnitude larger than prior benchmarks. On held-out splits, UniField reports average gains of ~1.81 dB PSNR and ~9.47% SSIM over MO-U-Net, MSFA, LowGAN, and FlashVSR (Tables 2–3), with ablations supporting multi-modality/multi-task unification and FASRM (Table 4, Fig. 4).

Significance. If the gains hold under stronger evaluation, the work is practically useful: a single model that covers portable ultra-low-field and clinical-to-ultra-high-field enhancement, plus a larger registered multi-center resource, would lower the barrier to bedside high-fidelity MRI and to 7T-like detail without new hardware. The explicit attempt to inject field-physics priors into spectral loss weights is a concrete, testable design choice rather than pure architecture search. Public code and dataset release (promised) would further raise impact. The contribution is incremental relative to existing flow-matching / video-prior super-resolution lines, but the unification + FASRM + data package is a coherent package for the medical imaging community.

major comments (3)

Tables 2–3 and the headline 1.81 dB / 9.47% averages rest on extremely small held-out cohorts (Table 1: e.g. Leiden n_test=2, UNC n_test=2, BNU n_test=4; total 64mT o3T test subjects ≈17, 3T o7T ≈6). No subject-level standard deviations, confidence intervals, or paired statistical tests are reported. With such N, center-specific residual misregistration or intensity idiosyncrasies after the 8:2 split can dominate the mean. The central superiority claim is therefore under-powered until uncertainty quantification (or leave-one-center-out) is added.
§2.3 / Eq. (2) and the experimental setup fix FASRM band weights by hand ([1,1,0.5] for 64mT o3T; [0.5,1,1] for 3T o7T) from a physics narrative (missing high-frequency cues vs B1 low-frequency artifacts). Table 4 only ablates FASRM on/off; there is no sensitivity study, learned weights, or alternative band partitions. Because these free parameters directly shape the spectral term that is credited for the high-frequency gains, the claim that FASRM “explicitly incorporates the physical mechanisms of magnetic fields” remains an unvalidated modeling choice rather than a demonstrated necessity.
The video-prior assumption (§2.2) that frozen FlashVSR encoder/decoder + LoRA yields faithful 3D anatomical structure (rather than video-like temporal artifacts) is load-bearing for the “3D foundation model” contribution, yet is supported only by end-to-end PSNR/SSIM and qualitative error maps. No intermediate latent diagnostics, slice-consistency metrics, or comparison against a 3D MRI foundation model (or training the same architecture from scratch on the new dataset) are provided. Without that, it is unclear how much of the gain is the prior versus the larger unified training set and FASRM.

minor comments (5)

Abstract and introduction claim an “order of magnitude larger” dataset; Table 1 totals ~113 subjects. Clarify the exact comparison baseline (prior paired multi-field sets) so the claim is falsifiable.
Eq. (2) notation is dense (w_k, α, λ_s, λ_f, binary masks M_k, 3D coordinates f). A short expanded definition or pseudocode for the band masks would aid reproducibility.
Fig. 3 error maps use “darker = larger error,” which is opposite common residual visualizations; a colorbar and consistent polarity would reduce misreading.
Training is reported as 1,000 iterations, batch size 1 on one A6000. Confirm whether this is full convergence or early stopping, and whether the same budget was used for all baselines.
Several author-group self-citations appear for the dataset/prior narrative; ensure independent multi-field enhancement baselines (beyond the four listed) are also discussed for completeness.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

Empirical supervised enhancement with no derivation that redefines its target; mild self-reference in dataset/prior citations is not load-bearing.

full rationale

UniField is a standard supervised generative enhancement pipeline (latent flow-matching on FlashVSR with LoRA + a hand-weighted spatial-frequency loss). The central claims are empirical: a single multi-modality multi-task model plus FASRM band weights outperforms isolated baselines and ablations on held-out multi-center splits (Tables 2–4). There is no first-principles derivation whose output is forced by construction from its inputs. The FASRM weights ([1,1,0.5] for 64mT o3T; [0.5,1,1] for 3T o7T) and the video-prior assumption are design choices motivated by physics intuition and then validated by ablation (Table 4, Fig. 4); they are not fitted to the test metrics and then re-reported as predictions. Self-citations (e.g., Wang et al. dataset/prior works, FlashVSR backbone) supply data or initialization but do not supply a uniqueness theorem or ansatz that forces the reported PSNR/SSIM gains. The paper is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks; circularity burden is negligible (score 1).

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central empirical claim rests on domain transfer assumptions (video↔MRI, shared degradation across fields/modalities), a small set of hand-chosen spectral and loss weights, and the new FASRM mechanism. No formal derivation; free parameters are the usual ML knobs plus task-specific frequency schedules that directly implement the 'physics' story. Invented pieces are the named modules and the curated pairing, not new physical particles.

free parameters (3)

FASRM frequency-band weights w_k = [1,1,0.5] (64mT→3T); [0.5,1,1] (3T→7T)
Set by hand to [1,1,0.5] for 64mT-to-3T and [0.5,1,1] for 3T-to-7T; these choices instantiate the claimed field physics and directly affect the spectral loss that is credited for the gains.
spatial/spectral loss balances λ_s, λ_f and dynamic scale α = λ_s=1.0, λ_f=0.1 (as stated in setup)
Enter Eq. (2) as free multipliers on velocity and FFT residual terms; values are stated as experimental settings rather than derived.
training schedule (lr, iterations, batch size, LoRA/sparse-attention config) = lr=1e-4, 1000 iters, batch=1
1000 Adam steps, batch 1, lr 1e-4 with linear decay after 500, plus unspecified LoRA rank and sparse attention details control what the unified network actually learns on the small paired set.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Lower-field MRI degradation patterns are highly consistent across modalities (T1/T2/FLAIR) and across 64mT→3T and 3T→7T transitions, so joint training is valid implicit data augmentation.
Stated in §2 under unified modeling; without it the multi-task mutual-promotion claim collapses.
domain assumption 3D MRI volumes and 2D natural video share analogous spatiotemporal structure and enhancement goals, so a frozen FlashVSR video prior supplies useful anatomical representations.
Explicit justification for initializing from FlashVSR and freezing encoder/decoder (§2).
ad hoc to paper For 64mT→3T, high-frequency target content lacks source cues so high-frequency loss should be relaxed; for 3T→7T, B1 inhomogeneity lives mainly in low frequencies so low-frequency learning should be down-weighted.
Physical story used to design FASRM band weights (§2.3); plausible but not independently measured in this paper.
domain assumption Standard flow-matching / ODE sampling in latent space plus LoRA fine-tuning is a valid generative backbone for MRI field enhancement.
Background ML practice assumed throughout §2; not re-derived.

invented entities (3)

Field-Aware Spectral Rectification Mechanism (FASRM) / field-aware spatial-frequency loss (FASFL)
purpose: Task-conditioned reweighting of FFT bands to reduce over-smoothing and artifact copying in flow-matching MRI enhancement.
Named new module; independent evidence is only the paper's own ablations, not an external physical measurement of the chosen weights.
UniField unified multi-modality multi-transition enhancement framework
purpose: Single LoRA-adapted network conditioned on modality and field pair instead of isolated per-task models.
Architectural packaging of existing components; value is empirical, not a new physical object.
Curated registered multi-center paired multi-field MRI benchmark independent evidence
purpose: Relieve data scarcity and enable unified training/evaluation across 64mT–3T and 3T–7T.
Aggregation and registration of existing public cohorts; useful resource but not an independent physical discovery.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of UniField: A Unified Field-Aware MRI Enhancement Framework." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JV4FXLVN

@misc{pith2026260309223,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: UniField: A Unified Field-Aware MRI Enhancement Framework},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JV4FXLVN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.09223}
}

read the original abstract

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) field-strength enhancement holds immense value for both clinical diagnostics and advanced research. However, existing methods typically focus on isolated enhancement tasks, such as specific 64mT-to-3T or 3T-to-7T transitions using limited subject cohorts, thereby failing to exploit the shared degradation patterns inherent across different field strengths and severely restricting model generalization. To address this challenge, we propose \methodname, a unified framework integrating multiple modalities and enhancement tasks to mutually promote representation learning by exploiting these shared degradation characteristics. Specifically, our main contributions are threefold. Firstly, to overcome MRI data scarcity and capture continuous anatomical structures, \methodname departs from conventional methods that treat 3D MRI volumes as independent 2D slices. Instead, we directly exploit comprehensive 3D volumetric information by leveraging pre-trained 3D foundation models, thereby embedding generalized and robust structural representations to significantly boost enhancement performance. In addition, to mitigate the spectral bias of mainstream flow-matching models that often over-smooth high-frequency details, we explicitly incorporate the physical mechanisms of magnetic fields to introduce a Field-Aware Spectral Rectification Mechanism (FASRM), tailoring customized spectral corrections to distinct field strengths. Finally, to resolve the fundamental data bottleneck, we organize and publicly release a comprehensive paired multi-field MRI dataset, which is an order of magnitude larger than existing datasets. Extensive experiments demonstrate our method's superiority over state-of-the-art approaches, achieving an average improvement of approximately 1.81 dB in PSNR and 9.47% in SSIM. Codes and datasets are available at: https://github.com/linyiyang98/UniField.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

19 extracted references

[1]

Human Brain Mapping46(1), e70112 (2025)

Baljer, L., Zhang, Y., Bourke, N.J., Donald, K.A., Bradford, L.E., Ringshaw, J.E., Williams, S.R., Deoni, S.C., Williams, S.C., Team, K.S.S., et al.: Ultra-low-field paediatric mri in low-and middle-income countries: Super-resolution using a multi- orientation u-net. Human Brain Mapping46(1), e70112 (2025)

2025
[2]

Preprint (2025)

van den Broek, R.B., Lena, B., Webb, A.: Paired 64mt and 3t brain mri scans of healthy subjects for neuroimaging research. Preprint (2025)

2025
[3]

Scientific Data10(489) (2023)

Chen, X., Qu, L., Xie, Y., Ahmad, S., Yap, P.T.: A paired dataset of t1-and t2- weighted mri at 3 tesla and 7 tesla. Scientific Data10(489) (2023)

2023
[4]

Scientific Data12(260) (2025)

Chu, L., Ma, B., Dong, X., He, Y., Che, T., Zeng, D., Zhang, Z., Li, S.: A paired dataset of multi-modal mri at 3 tesla and 7 tesla with manual hippocampal subfield segmentations. Scientific Data12(260) (2025)

2025
[5]

In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention

Cui, Q., Tosun, D., Mukherjee, P., Abbasi-Asl, R.: 7t mri synthesization from 3t acquisitions. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. pp. 35–44. Springer (2024)

2024
[6]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition

Fei, B., Lyu, Z., Pan, L., Zhang, J., Yang, W., Luo, T., Zhang, B., Dai, B.: Genera- tive diffusion prior for unified image restoration and enhancement. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 9935–9946 (2023)

2023
[7]

In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention

He, Z., Li, W., Jiang, Y., Peng, Z., Wang, P., Li, X., Liu, T., Han, J., Zhang, T., Yuan, Y.: F2tnet: Fmri to t1w mri knowledge transfer network for brain multi- phenotype prediction. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. pp. 265–275. Springer (2024)

2024
[8]

Scientific Reports13(1), 21183 (2023)

Islam, K.T., Zhong, S., Zakavi, P., et al.: Improving portable low-field mri image quality through image-to-image translation using paired low-and high-field images. Scientific Reports13(1), 21183 (2023)

2023

Show all 19 references

[9]

Katti, G., Ara, S.A., Shireen, A.: Magnetic resonance imaging (mri)–a review. Int. J. Dent. Clin3(1), 65–70 (2011)

2011
[10]

Radiology315(1), e233529 (2025)

Lucas, A., Arnold, T.C., Okar, S.V., Vadali, C., Kawatra, K.D., Ren, Z., Cao, Q., Shinohara, R.T., Schindler, M.K., Davis, K.A., et al.: Multisequence 3-t image synthesis from 64-mt low-field-strength mri using generative adversarial networks in multiple sclerosis. Radiology31...

2025
[11]

In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention

Peng, Z., He, Z., Jiang, Y., Wang, P., Yuan, Y.: Gbt: Geometric-oriented brain transformer for autism diagnosis. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. pp. 142–152. Springer (2024)

2024
[12]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.00846 (2025)

Peng, Z., Wang, C., Liu, S., Liang, Z., Ye, Z., Ju, M., Woo, P., Yuan, Y.: Om- nibrainbench: A comprehensive multimodal benchmark for brain imaging analysis across multi-stage clinical tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.00846 (2025)

2025
[13]

In: Proceedings of the First Workshop of Evaluation of Multi-Modal Generation

Pirhadi, M.J., Mirzaei, M., Eetemadi, S.: Cvt5: Using compressed video encoder and umt5 for dense video captioning. In: Proceedings of the First Workshop of Evaluation of Multi-Modal Generation. pp. 10–23 (2025)

2025
[14]

ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks18(4), 1–44 (2022) 10 F

Sun, Z., Yang, H., Liu, K., Yin, Z., Li, Z., Xu, W.: Recent advances in lora: A comprehensive survey. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks18(4), 1–44 (2022) 10 F. Author et al

2022
[15]

Imaging Neuroscience 3 (2025)

Váša, F., Bennallick, C., Bourke, N.J., Padormo, F., Baljer, L., Briski, U., Cawley, P., Arichi, T., Wood, T.C., Lythgoe, D.J., et al.: Ultra-low-field brain mri mor- phometry: Test–retest reliability and correspondence to high-field mri. Imaging Neuroscience 3 (2025)

2025
[16]

IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics28(11), 6429–6440 (2024)

Wang, C., Lei, Y., Chen, T., Zhang, J., Li, Y., Shan, H.: Hope: Hybrid-granularity ordinal prototype learning for progression prediction of mild cognitive impairment. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics28(11), 6429–6440 (2024)

2024
[17]

Medical Image Analysis91, 103032 (2024)

Wang, C., Piao, S., Huang, Z., Gao, Q., Zhang, J., Li, Y., Shan, H., Initiative, A.D.N., et al.: Joint learning framework of cross-modal synthesis and diagnosis for alzheimer’s disease by mining underlying shared modality information. Medical Image Analysis91, 103032 (2024)

2024
[18]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition

Yang,K.,Hu,T.,Dai,K.,Chen,G.,Cao,Y.,Dong,W.,Wu,P.,Zhang,Y.,Yan,Q.: Crnet: A detail-preserving network for unified image restoration and enhancement task. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 6086–6096 (2024)

2024
[19]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.12747 (2025)

Zhuang, J., Guo, S., Cai, X., Li, X., Liu, Y., Yuan, C., Xue, T.: Flashvsr: To- wards real-time diffusion-based streaming video super-resolution. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.12747 (2025)

2025

Pith tools

Reviewed July 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Human Brain Mapping46(1), e70112 (2025)

Baljer, L., Zhang, Y., Bourke, N.J., Donald, K.A., Bradford, L.E., Ringshaw, J.E., Williams, S.R., Deoni, S.C., Williams, S.C., Team, K.S.S., et al.: Ultra-low-field paediatric mri in low-and middle-income countries: Super-resolution using a multi- orientation u-net. Human Brain Mapping46(1), e70112 (2025)

2025

[2] [2]

Preprint (2025)

van den Broek, R.B., Lena, B., Webb, A.: Paired 64mt and 3t brain mri scans of healthy subjects for neuroimaging research. Preprint (2025)

2025

[3] [3]

Scientific Data10(489) (2023)

Chen, X., Qu, L., Xie, Y., Ahmad, S., Yap, P.T.: A paired dataset of t1-and t2- weighted mri at 3 tesla and 7 tesla. Scientific Data10(489) (2023)

2023

[4] [4]

Scientific Data12(260) (2025)

Chu, L., Ma, B., Dong, X., He, Y., Che, T., Zeng, D., Zhang, Z., Li, S.: A paired dataset of multi-modal mri at 3 tesla and 7 tesla with manual hippocampal subfield segmentations. Scientific Data12(260) (2025)

2025

[5] [5]

In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention

Cui, Q., Tosun, D., Mukherjee, P., Abbasi-Asl, R.: 7t mri synthesization from 3t acquisitions. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. pp. 35–44. Springer (2024)

2024

[6] [6]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition

Fei, B., Lyu, Z., Pan, L., Zhang, J., Yang, W., Luo, T., Zhang, B., Dai, B.: Genera- tive diffusion prior for unified image restoration and enhancement. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 9935–9946 (2023)

2023

[7] [7]

In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention

He, Z., Li, W., Jiang, Y., Peng, Z., Wang, P., Li, X., Liu, T., Han, J., Zhang, T., Yuan, Y.: F2tnet: Fmri to t1w mri knowledge transfer network for brain multi- phenotype prediction. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. pp. 265–275. Springer (2024)

2024

[8] [8]

Scientific Reports13(1), 21183 (2023)

Islam, K.T., Zhong, S., Zakavi, P., et al.: Improving portable low-field mri image quality through image-to-image translation using paired low-and high-field images. Scientific Reports13(1), 21183 (2023)

2023