pith. sign in

arxiv: 2505.22090 · v2 · submitted 2025-05-28 · 📡 eess.IV · cs.LG

High Volume Rate 3D Ultrasound Reconstruction with Diffusion Models

Tristan S.W. Stevens , Ois\'in Nolan , Oudom Somphone , Jean-Luc Robert , Ruud J.G. van Sloun This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 13:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.IV cs.LG
keywords 3D ultrasound reconstructiondiffusion modelshigh volume ratecardiac ultrasoundundersampled elevation planesimage qualityuncertainty quantification
0
0 comments X

The pith

Diffusion models reconstruct 3D cardiac ultrasound volumes from fewer elevation planes while outperforming interpolation baselines.

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

The paper proposes using diffusion models to reconstruct full 3D ultrasound volumes from a reduced number of elevation planes acquired with diverging waves. This allows for higher volume rates than standard focused imaging while addressing the quality loss from undersampling. Traditional interpolation and supervised deep learning methods are compared on a cardiac dataset, with the diffusion approach showing better image quality and improved results on downstream tasks. The method also uses temporal consistency in sequences to speed up inference and employs probabilistic sampling to estimate reconstruction uncertainty. If effective, this could make high-frame-rate 3D ultrasound more feasible for clinical use by reducing the number of transmissions needed per volume.

Core claim

The central discovery is that diffusion models, when applied to reconstruct 3D ultrasound from undersampled elevation planes, consistently outperform both traditional interpolation and supervised deep learning methods in terms of image quality metrics and performance on downstream tasks such as automated measurements. By leveraging the probabilistic nature of diffusion posterior sampling, the approach also provides uncertainty quantification and demonstrates robustness on out-of-distribution data with synthetic anomalies.

What carries the argument

Diffusion models for posterior sampling to reconstruct missing elevation planes in 3D ultrasound volumes, accelerated by temporal consistency in sequences.

Load-bearing premise

The diffusion model trained on the specific 3D cardiac ultrasound dataset will generalize to new patients and acquisition settings without introducing clinically significant artifacts under strong subsampling.

What would settle it

Observing clinically significant artifacts or degraded performance on a test set from new patients or different scanners under the same strong subsampling conditions would falsify the generalization claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.22090 by Jean-Luc Robert, Ois\'in Nolan, Oudom Somphone, Ruud J.G. van Sloun, Tristan S.W. Stevens.

Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: 1) Variance heat map: By analyzing the pixel-wise variance across posterior samples, we can assess which regions exhibit higher or lower certainty, where x¯ is the sample mean: σ 2 x = E h (x − E[x])2 i ≈ 1 N X i h (x (i) − x¯) 2 i . (14) For instance, directly acquired scan lines are well-constrained by the measurement model and therefore exhibit minimal variance. In contrast, non-acquired scan lines rely… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Three-dimensional ultrasound enables real-time volumetric visualization of anatomical structures. Unlike traditional 2D ultrasound, 3D imaging reduces reliance on precise probe orientation, potentially making ultrasound more accessible to clinicians with varying levels of experience and improving automated measurements and post-exam analysis. However, achieving both high volume rates and high image quality remains a significant challenge. While 3D diverging waves can provide high volume rates, they suffer from limited tissue harmonic generation and increased multipath effects, which degrade image quality. One compromise is to retain focus in elevation while leveraging unfocused diverging waves in the lateral direction to reduce the number of transmissions per elevation plane. Reaching the volume rates achieved by full 3D diverging waves, however, requires dramatically undersampling the number of elevation planes. Subsequently, to render the full volume, simple interpolation techniques are applied. This paper introduces a novel approach to 3D ultrasound reconstruction from a reduced set of elevation planes by employing diffusion models (DMs) to achieve increased spatial and temporal resolution. We compare both traditional and supervised deep learning-based interpolation methods on a 3D cardiac ultrasound dataset. Our results show that DM-based reconstruction consistently outperforms the baselines in image quality and downstream task performance. Additionally, we accelerate inference by leveraging the temporal consistency inherent to ultrasound sequences. Finally, we explore the robustness of the proposed method by exploiting the probabilistic nature of diffusion posterior sampling to quantify reconstruction uncertainty and demonstrate improved recall on out-of-distribution data with synthetic anomalies under strong subsampling.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a diffusion model (DM) approach using diffusion posterior sampling to reconstruct high-volume-rate 3D cardiac ultrasound volumes from heavily subsampled elevation planes. It claims consistent outperformance over traditional interpolation and supervised deep-learning baselines in image quality metrics and downstream task performance, with additional techniques for temporal acceleration and uncertainty quantification via the probabilistic sampling process. Experiments are conducted on a single 3D cardiac ultrasound dataset, including synthetic anomaly tests for out-of-distribution robustness.

Significance. If the central claims hold under proper validation, the work could meaningfully advance high-frame-rate 3D ultrasound by replacing simple interpolation with a learned generative prior, potentially improving accessibility for less-experienced operators and enabling more reliable automated measurements. The explicit use of uncertainty maps from diffusion sampling is a clinically relevant addition not commonly present in supervised interpolation baselines.

major comments (3)
  1. Results section: the reported outperformance on image quality and downstream tasks is demonstrated on a single dataset without patient-wise cross-validation or acquisition-parameter ablation studies. This directly impacts the generalization premise required for the central claim that the DM prior transfers to new patients and probe settings under strong subsampling without clinically relevant artifacts.
  2. Methods/Experiments: the abstract and results describe OOD testing exclusively with synthetic anomalies; no quantitative evaluation of reconstruction artifacts on real inter-patient variability or scanner-setting shifts is provided, leaving the robustness claim under-supported for the load-bearing generalization requirement.
  3. Results: while the abstract states 'consistent outperformance,' the absence of patient-level statistics, error bars, or formal significance tests on the reported gains makes it impossible to assess whether the improvements survive distribution shift, as required to substantiate the main contribution.
minor comments (2)
  1. Abstract: include at least one quantitative example (e.g., PSNR or Dice improvement) and mention of statistical testing to make the 'consistent outperformance' claim more informative.
  2. Notation: clarify the precise subsampling factor (number of retained elevation planes) and the corresponding volume rate in the methods description for reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive feedback. We address each major comment below with clarifications and indicate the revisions we will make to improve the manuscript's support for its generalization and robustness claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Results section: the reported outperformance on image quality and downstream tasks is demonstrated on a single dataset without patient-wise cross-validation or acquisition-parameter ablation studies. This directly impacts the generalization premise required for the central claim that the DM prior transfers to new patients and probe settings under strong subsampling without clinically relevant artifacts.

    Authors: We agree that patient-wise cross-validation and acquisition-parameter ablations are important to substantiate generalization claims. The experiments are performed on a single but large 3D cardiac ultrasound dataset containing multiple independent acquisitions. In the revised manuscript we will add patient-level partitioning for cross-validation, report metrics stratified by patient, and include ablation studies varying the number of elevation planes and other acquisition parameters to directly address this concern. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Methods/Experiments: the abstract and results describe OOD testing exclusively with synthetic anomalies; no quantitative evaluation of reconstruction artifacts on real inter-patient variability or scanner-setting shifts is provided, leaving the robustness claim under-supported for the load-bearing generalization requirement.

    Authors: The OOD experiments use controlled synthetic anomalies to isolate specific distribution shifts relevant to ultrasound. We will expand the revised manuscript with additional quantitative analysis of inter-patient variability using the existing dataset splits and will add a limitations paragraph explicitly noting that real scanner-setting shifts would require multi-center data not available in the current study. revision: partial

  3. Referee: Results: while the abstract states 'consistent outperformance,' the absence of patient-level statistics, error bars, or formal significance tests on the reported gains makes it impossible to assess whether the improvements survive distribution shift, as required to substantiate the main contribution.

    Authors: We acknowledge the need for statistical rigor. The revised manuscript will include patient-level mean and standard deviation, error bars on all quantitative plots, and formal significance testing (paired t-tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with correction) on the reported improvements to allow readers to evaluate whether gains persist under distribution shift. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper applies established diffusion posterior sampling techniques to 3D cardiac ultrasound reconstruction from undersampled elevation planes and reports empirical outperformance versus interpolation and supervised baselines on a single dataset. No load-bearing derivation step reduces by the paper's own equations or self-citation to a fitted input or author-defined ansatz; the central claims rest on comparative experiments rather than a closed mathematical loop. The method is self-contained against external benchmarks because performance is measured directly against non-author baselines without invoking uniqueness theorems or renaming known results as novel derivations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that a diffusion model trained on the cardiac dataset can accurately impute missing elevation planes; details on training hyperparameters, loss functions, and exact subsampling factors are not visible in the abstract, so the ledger is necessarily incomplete.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Ultrasound data follows a distribution that diffusion models can learn to sample from for inpainting tasks
    Implicit in the use of diffusion posterior sampling for reconstruction

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5814 in / 1152 out tokens · 47263 ms · 2026-05-19T13:58:56.208996+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Patient-Adaptive Echocardiography using Cognitive Ultrasound

    eess.SP 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A temporal diffusion model enables adaptive selection of focused ultrasound transmits, outperforming random subsampling and diverging waves on EchoNet-Dynamic and in-house echocardiogram datasets while supporting real...

  2. zea: A Toolbox for Cognitive Ultrasound Imaging

    eess.SP 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    zea is a Python toolbox that supplies a modular differentiable pipeline for ultrasound imaging and signal processing, built on Keras 3 to support TensorFlow, PyTorch, and JAX backends.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Real-time 3D ultrasound: A new look at the heart,

    G. D. Stetten, T. Ota, C. J. Ohazama, C. Fleishman, J. Castellucci, J. Oxaal, T. Ryan, J. Kisslo, and O. v. Ramm, “Real-time 3D ultrasound: A new look at the heart,”Journal of Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Procedures, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 73–84, 1998

    work page 1998

  2. [2]

    Three-dimensional ultrasound imag- ing,

    T. R. Nelson and D. H. Pretorius, “Three-dimensional ultrasound imag- ing,”Ultrasound in medicine & biology, vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 1243–1270, 1998

    work page 1998

  3. [3]

    Three-dimensional ultrasound scanning,

    A. Fenster, G. Parraga, and J. Bax, “Three-dimensional ultrasound scanning,”Interface focus, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 503–519, 2011

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    Cardiac chamber volumetric assessment using 3D ultrasound-a review,

    J. Pedrosa, D. Barbosa, N. Almeida, O. Bernard, J. Boschet al., “Cardiac chamber volumetric assessment using 3D ultrasound-a review,”Current pharmaceutical design, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 105–121, 2016

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Three-dimensional echocardiography: current status and real-life applications,

    V . C.-C. Wu and M. Takeuchi, “Three-dimensional echocardiography: current status and real-life applications,”Acta Cardiologica Sinica, vol. 33, no. 2, p. 107, 2017

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    3D Cardiac Deformation from Ultrasound Images,

    X. Papademetris, A. J. Sinusas, D. P. Dione, and J. S. Duncan, “3D Cardiac Deformation from Ultrasound Images,” inMedical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention - MICCAI’99, Second International Conference, Cambridge, UK, September 19-22, 1999, Proceedings, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, C. J. Taylor and A. C. F. Colchester, Eds., vol...

    work page doi:10.1007/10704282 1999

  7. [7]

    Recent ad- vances in ultrasound breast imaging: from industry to clinical practice,

    O. Catalano, R. Fusco, F. De Muzio, I. Simonetti, P. Palumbo, F. Bruno, A. Borgheresi, A. Agostini, M. Gabelloni, C. Varelliet al., “Recent ad- vances in ultrasound breast imaging: from industry to clinical practice,” Diagnostics, vol. 13, no. 5, p. 980, 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    3D ultrasound imaging: applications in image-guided therapy and biopsy,

    A. Fenster, K. J. M. Surry, W. L. Smith, J. Gill, and D. B. Downey, “3D ultrasound imaging: applications in image-guided therapy and biopsy,”Comput. Graph., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 557–568, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0097-8493(02)00101-2

    work page doi:10.1016/s0097-8493(02)00101-2 2002

  9. [9]

    The role of automated 3D echocardiography for left ventricular ejection fraction assessment,

    E. Spitzer, B. Ren, F. Zijlstra, N. M. Van Mieghem, and M. L. Geleijnse, “The role of automated 3D echocardiography for left ventricular ejection fraction assessment,”Cardiac failure review, vol. 3, no. 2, p. 97, 2017

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    3D Strain Assessment in Ultrasound (Straus): A Synthetic Comparison of Five Tracking Methodologies,

    M. D. Craene, S. Marchesseau, B. Heyde, H. Gao, M. Alessandrini, O. Bernard, G. Piella, A. R. Porras, L. Tautz, A. Hennemuth, A. Prakosa, H. Liebgott, O. Somphone, P. Allain, S. Makram-Ebeid, H. Delingette, M. Sermesant, J. D’hooge, and E. Saloux, “3D Strain Assessment in Ultrasound (Straus): A Synthetic Comparison of Five Tracking Methodologies,”IEEE Tra...

    work page doi:10.1109/tmi.2013.2261823 2013

  11. [11]

    3-D motion tracking and vascular strain imaging using bistatic dual aperture ultrasound acquisitions,

    H. de Hoop, E. Maas, J.-W. Muller, H.-M. Schwab, and R. Lopata, “3-D motion tracking and vascular strain imaging using bistatic dual aperture ultrasound acquisitions,”Physics in Medicine & Biology, vol. 70, no. 4, p. 045013, 2025

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    A review on real-time 3D ultrasound imag- ing technology,

    Q. Huang and Z. Zeng, “A review on real-time 3D ultrasound imag- ing technology,”BioMed research international, vol. 2017, no. 1, p. 6027029, 2017

    work page 2017

  13. [13]

    Active inference and deep generative modeling for cognitive ultrasound,

    R. J. Van Sloun, “Active inference and deep generative modeling for cognitive ultrasound,”IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control, 2024

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    On the impact of microbeamformers in 3-d high frame rate ultrasound imaging: A simulation study,

    L. Castrignano, P. Tortoli, G. Matrone, M. Crocco, A. S. Savoia, and A. Ramalli, “On the impact of microbeamformers in 3-d high frame rate ultrasound imaging: A simulation study,”IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 2025

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Integrated hybrid sub-aperture beamforming and time-division multiplexing for massive readout in ultrasound imaging,

    A. Rezvanitabar, G. Jung, C. Tekes, T. M. Carpenter, D. M. Cow- ell, S. Freear, and F. L. Degertekin, “Integrated hybrid sub-aperture beamforming and time-division multiplexing for massive readout in ultrasound imaging,”IEEE transactions on biomedical circuits and systems, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 972–980, 2022

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    Augmented Performance Bounds on Strictly Linear and Widely Linear Estimators With Complex Data,

    N. Wagner, Y . C. Eldar, and Z. Friedman, “Compressed Beamforming in Ultrasound Imaging,”IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 60, no. 9, pp. 4643–4657, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP. 2012.2200891

    work page doi:10.1109/tsp 2012

  17. [17]

    Sub-nyquist sampling and fourier domain beamforming in volumetric ultrasound imaging,

    A. Burshtein, M. Birk, T. Chernyakova, A. Eilam, A. Kempinski, and Y . C. Eldar, “Sub-nyquist sampling and fourier domain beamforming in volumetric ultrasound imaging,”IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control, vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 703–716, 2016

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    Compressed Sensing Reconstruction of 3D Ultrasound Data Using Dictionary Learning and Line-wise Subsampling,

    O. Lorintiu, H. Liebgott, M. Alessandrini, O. Bernard, and D. Friboulet, “Compressed Sensing Reconstruction of 3D Ultrasound Data Using Dictionary Learning and Line-wise Subsampling,”IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 2467–2477, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2015.2442154

    work page doi:10.1109/tmi.2015.2442154 2015

  19. [19]

    Learning sub-sampling and signal recovery with applications in ultrasound imaging,

    I. A. Huijben, B. S. Veeling, K. Janse, M. Mischi, and R. J. van Sloun, “Learning sub-sampling and signal recovery with applications in ultrasound imaging,”IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 39, no. 12, pp. 3955–3966, 2020

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    Real-time Interpo- lation for True 3-Dimensional Ultrasound Image V olumes,

    S. Ji, D. W. Roberts, A. Hartov, and K. D. Paulsen, “Real-time Interpo- lation for True 3-Dimensional Ultrasound Image V olumes,”Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 243–252, 2011

    work page 2011

  21. [21]

    Deep learning in ultrasound imaging,

    R. J. Van Sloun, R. Cohen, and Y . C. Eldar, “Deep learning in ultrasound imaging,”Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 108, no. 1, pp. 11–29, 2019

    work page 2019

  22. [22]

    Deep Generative Models for Bayesian Inference on High-rate Sensor Data: Applications in Automotive Radar and Medical Imaging,

    T. S. W. Stevens, J. Overdevest, O. Nolan, W. L. van Nierop, R. J. G. van Sloun, and Y . C. Eldar, “Deep Generative Models for Bayesian Inference on High-rate Sensor Data: Applications in Automotive Radar and Medical Imaging,”Philosophical Transactions A, 2025

    work page 2025

  23. [23]

    Deep attentional GAN-based high-resolution ultrasound imag- 12 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, VOL. XX, NO. XX, DECEMBER 2025 ing,

    X. He, Y . Lei, Y . Liu, Z. Tian, T. Wang, W. J. Curran, T. Liu, and X. Yang, “Deep attentional GAN-based high-resolution ultrasound imag- 12 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, VOL. XX, NO. XX, DECEMBER 2025 ing,” inMedical Imaging 2020: Ultrasonic Imaging and Tomography, vol. 11319. SPIE, 2020, pp. 61–66

    work page 2025

  24. [24]

    Self-supervised learning for accelerated 3D high-resolution ultrasound imaging,

    X. Dai, Y . Lei, T. Wang, M. Axente, D. Xu, P. Patel, A. B. Jani, W. J. Curran, T. Liu, and X. Yang, “Self-supervised learning for accelerated 3D high-resolution ultrasound imaging,”Medical Physics, vol. 48, no. 7, pp. 3916–3926, 2021

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Towards Realistic 3D Ultrasound Synthesis: Deformable Augmentation using Conditional Variational Autoencoders,

    D. Wulff, T. Dohnke, N. T. Nguyen, and F. Ernst, “Towards Realistic 3D Ultrasound Synthesis: Deformable Augmentation using Conditional Variational Autoencoders,” in36th IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems, CBMS 2023, L’Aquila, Italy, June 22-24, 2023, J. R. Almeida, M. Spiliopoulou, J. A. Ben ´ıtez-Andrades, G. Placidi, A. R. Go...

    work page doi:10.1109/cbms58004.2023.00326 2023

  26. [26]

    SAC: semantic attention composition for text-conditioned image retrieval

    P. Guo, C. Zhao, D. Yang, Z. Xu, V . Nath, Y . Tang, B. Simon, M. Belue, S. A. Harmon, B. Turkbey, and D. Xu, “MAISI: Medical AI for Synthetic Imaging,” inIEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, WACV 2025, Tucson, AZ, USA, February 26 - March 6, 2025. IEEE, 2025, pp. 4430–4441. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/W ACV61041...

    work page doi:10.1109/w 2025

  27. [27]

    Hierarchical Amortized GAN for 3D High Resolution Medical Image Synthesis,

    L. Sun, J. Chen, Y . Xu, M. Gong, K. Yu, and K. Batmanghelich, “Hierarchical Amortized GAN for 3D High Resolution Medical Image Synthesis,”IEEE J. Biomed. Health Informatics, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 3966–3975, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/JBHI. 2022.3172976

    work page doi:10.1109/jbhi 2022

  28. [28]

    2024 , url =

    Q. Chen, X. Chen, H. Song, Z. Xiong, A. L. Yuille, C. Wei, and Z. Zhou, “Towards Generalizable Tumor Synthesis,” inIEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2024, Seattle, WA, USA, June 16-22, 2024. IEEE, 2024, pp. 11 147–11 158. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR52733.2024.01060

    work page doi:10.1109/cvpr52733.2024.01060 2024

  29. [29]

    Echo from Noise: Synthetic Ultrasound Image Generation Using Diffusion Models for Real Image Segmentation,

    D. Stojanovski, U. Hermida, P. Lamata, A. Beqiri, and A. G ´omez, “Echo from Noise: Synthetic Ultrasound Image Generation Using Diffusion Models for Real Image Segmentation,” inSimplifying Medical Ultrasound - 4th International Workshop, ASMUS 2023, Held in Conjunction with MICCAI 2023, Vancouver, BC, Canada, October 8, 2023, Proceedings, ser. Lecture Not...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-44521-7 2023

  30. [30]

    Diffusion as Sound Propagation: Physics-inspired Model for Ultrasound Image Generation,

    M. Dom ´ınguez, Y . Velikova, N. Navab, and M. F. Azampour, “Diffusion as Sound Propagation: Physics-inspired Model for Ultrasound Image Generation,” inMedical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention - MICCAI 2024 - 27th International Conference, Marrakesh, Morocco, October 6-10, 2024, Proceedings, Part IV, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Scienc...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-72083-3 2024

  31. [31]

    Ultrasound image generation using latent diffusion models,

    B. Freiche, A. El-Khoury, A. Nasiri-Sarvi, M. S. Hosseini, D. Garcia, A. Basarab, M. Boily, and H. Rivaz, “Ultrasound image generation using latent diffusion models,” inMedical Imaging 2025: Ultrasonic Imaging and Tomography, vol. 13412. SPIE, 2025, pp. 287–292

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Removing Structured Noise using Diffusion Models,

    T. S. W. Stevens, H. V . Gorp, F. C. Meral, J. S. Shin, J. Yu, J. Robert, and R. van Sloun, “Removing Structured Noise using Diffusion Models,”Trans. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 2025, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=BvKYsaOVEn

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    Dehazing Ultrasound Using Diffusion Models,

    T. S. W. Stevens, F. C. Meral, J. Yu, I. Z. Apostolakis, J. Robert, and R. J. G. van Sloun, “Dehazing Ultrasound Using Diffusion Models,” IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging, vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 3546–3558, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2024.3363460

    work page doi:10.1109/tmi.2024.3363460 2024

  34. [34]

    Denoising plane wave ultrasound images using diffusion probabilistic models,

    H. Asgariandehkordi, S. Goudarzi, M. Sharifzadeh, A. Basarab, and H. Rivaz, “Denoising plane wave ultrasound images using diffusion probabilistic models,”IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control, 2024

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Ultrasound Image Reconstruction with Denoising Diffusion Restoration Models,

    Y . Zhang, C. Huneau, J. Idier, and D. Mateus, “Ultrasound Image Reconstruction with Denoising Diffusion Restoration Models,” inDeep Generative Models - Third MICCAI Workshop, DGM4MICCAI 2023, Held in Conjunction with MICCAI 2023, Vancouver, BC, Canada, October 8, 2023, Proceedings, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, A. Mukhopadhyay, I. ¨Oks¨uz, S. E...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-53767-7 2023

  36. [36]

    Denoising Diffusion Models for 3D Healthy Brain Tissue Inpainting,

    A. Durrer, J. Wolleb, F. Bieder, P. Friedrich, L. Melie-Garc ´ıa, M. Ocampo-Pineda, C. I. Bercea, I. E. Hamamci, B. Wiestler, M. Piraud, ¨O. Yaldizli, C. Granziera, B. H. Menze, P. C. Cattin, and F. Kofler, “Denoising Diffusion Models for 3D Healthy Brain Tissue Inpainting,” inDeep Generative Models - 4th MICCAI Workshop, DGM4MICCAI 2024, Held in Conjunct...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-72744-3 2024

  37. [37]

    Data-driven process- ing using parametric neural network for improved Bluetooth Channel Sounding distance estimation,

    S. W. Penninga, H. V . Gorp, and R. J. G. van Sloun, “Deep Sylvester Posterior Inference for Adaptive Compressed Sensing in Ultrasound Imaging,” in2025 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, ICASSP 2025, Hyderabad, India, April 6-11, 2025. IEEE, 2025, pp. 1–5. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP49660.2025...

    work page doi:10.1109/icassp49660.2025.10888253 2025

  38. [38]

    A survey on generative diffusion models,

    H. Cao, C. Tan, Z. Gao, Y . Xu, G. Chen, P.-A. Heng, and S. Z. Li, “A survey on generative diffusion models,”IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 2814–2830, 2024

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    Data-driven process- ing using parametric neural network for improved Bluetooth Channel Sounding distance estimation,

    T. S. W. Stevens, O. Nolan, J. Robert, and R. J. G. van Sloun, “Sequential Posterior Sampling with Diffusion Models,” in2025 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, ICASSP 2025, Hyderabad, India, April 6-11, 2025. IEEE, 2025, pp. 1–5. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP49660.2025.10889752

    work page doi:10.1109/icassp49660.2025.10889752 2025

  40. [40]

    On Distillation of Guided Diffusion Models,

    C. Meng, R. Rombach, R. Gao, D. P. Kingma, S. Ermon, J. Ho, and T. Salimans, “On Distillation of Guided Diffusion Models,” inIEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2023, Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 17-24,

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    Motiondiffuser: Controllable multi-agent motion prediction using diffusion

    IEEE, 2023, pp. 14 297–14 306. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1109/CVPR52729.2023.01374

    work page doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.01374 2023

  42. [42]

    Dual conditioned diffusion models for out-of-distribution detection: Application to fetal ultrasound videos,

    D. Mishra, H. Zhao, P. Saha, A. T. Papageorghiou, and J. A. Noble, “Dual conditioned diffusion models for out-of-distribution detection: Application to fetal ultrasound videos,” inInternational Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, 2023, pp. 216–226

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    Usfm: A universal ultrasound foundation model generalized to tasks and organs towards label efficient image analysis,

    J. Jiao, J. Zhou, X. Li, M. Xia, Y . Huang, L. Huang, N. Wang, X. Zhang, S. Zhou, Y . Wanget al., “Usfm: A universal ultrasound foundation model generalized to tasks and organs towards label efficient image analysis,” Medical image analysis, vol. 96, p. 103202, 2024

    work page 2024

  44. [44]

    Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models,

    J. Ho, A. Jain, and P. Abbeel, “Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models,” inAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2020, NeurIPS 2020, December 6-12, 2020, virtual, H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M. Balcan, and H. Lin, Eds.,

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    Available: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/ hash/4c5bcfec8584af0d967f1ab10179ca4b-Abstract.html

    [Online]. Available: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/ hash/4c5bcfec8584af0d967f1ab10179ca4b-Abstract.html

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Score-based Generative Modeling through Stochastic Differential Equations,

    Y . Song, J. Sohl-Dickstein, D. P. Kingma, A. Kumar, S. Ermon, and B. Poole, “Score-based Generative Modeling through Stochastic Differential Equations,” in9th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2021, Virtual Event, Austria, May 3-7, 2021. OpenReview.net, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/ forum?id=PxTIG12RRHS

    work page 2021

  47. [47]

    Denoising: A Powerful Building-block for Imaging, Inverse Problems, and Machine Learning,

    P. Milanfar and M. Delbracio, “Denoising: A Powerful Building-block for Imaging, Inverse Problems, and Machine Learning,”Philosophical Transactions A, vol. 383, no. 2299, p. 20240326, 2025

    work page 2025

  48. [48]

    Denoising Diffusion Implicit Models,

    J. Song, C. Meng, and S. Ermon, “Denoising Diffusion Implicit Models,” in9th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2021, Virtual Event, Austria, May 3-7, 2021. OpenReview.net, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=St1giarCHLP

    work page 2021

  49. [49]

    A Survey on Diffusion Models for Inverse Problems

    G. Daras, H. Chung, C. Lai, Y . Mitsufuji, J. C. Ye, P. Milanfar, A. G. Dimakis, and M. Delbracio, “A Survey on Diffusion Models for Inverse Problems,”CoRR, vol. abs/2410.00083, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2410.00083

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.00083 2024

  50. [50]

    Pseudoinverse- guided diffusion models for inverse problems,

    J. Song, A. Vahdat, M. Mardani, and J. Kautz, “Pseudoinverse- guided diffusion models for inverse problems,” inInternational Conference on Learning Representations, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=9 gsMA8MRKQ

    work page 2023

  51. [51]

    A variational perspective on solving inverse problems with diffusion models,

    M. Mardani, J. Song, J. Kautz, and A. Vahdat, “A variational perspective on solving inverse problems with diffusion models,” inThe Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023

    work page 2023

  52. [52]

    Diffusion Posterior Sampling for General Noisy Inverse Problems,

    H. Chung, J. Kim, M. T. McCann, M. L. Klasky, and J. C. Ye, “Diffusion Posterior Sampling for General Noisy Inverse Problems,” in The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2023, Kigali, Rwanda, May 1-5, 2023. OpenReview.net, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=OnD9zGAGT0k

    work page 2023

  53. [53]

    The curse of dimensionality,

    M. K ¨oppen, “The curse of dimensionality,” in5th online world confer- ence on soft computing in industrial applications (WSC5), vol. 1, 2000, pp. 4–8

    work page 2000

  54. [54]

    Solving 3D Inverse Problems Using Pre-trained 2D Diffusion Models,

    H. Chung, D. Ryu, M. T. McCann, M. L. Klasky, and J. C. Ye, “Solving 3D Inverse Problems Using Pre-trained 2D Diffusion Models,” inIEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2023, Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 17-24, TRISTAN S.W. STEVENSet al.: HIGH VOLUME RATE 3D ULTRASOUND RECONSTRUCTION WITH DIFFUSION MODELS 13

    work page 2023

  55. [55]

    Motiondiffuser: Controllable multi-agent motion prediction using diffusion

    IEEE, 2023, pp. 22 542–22 551. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1109/CVPR52729.2023.02159

    work page doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.02159 2023

  56. [56]

    Warped Diffusion: Solving Video Inverse Problems with Image Diffusion Models,

    G. Daras, W. Nie, K. Kreis, A. Dimakis, M. Mardani, N. B. Kovachki, and A. Vahdat, “Warped Diffusion: Solving Video Inverse Problems with Image Diffusion Models,” inAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems 38: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2024, NeurIPS 2024, Vancouver, BC, Canada, December 10 - 15, 2024, A. Globerson...

    work page 2024

  57. [57]

    Available: http://papers.nips.cc/paper files/paper/2024/ hash/b736c4b0b38876c9249db9bd900c1a86-Abstract-Conference.html

    [Online]. Available: http://papers.nips.cc/paper files/paper/2024/ hash/b736c4b0b38876c9249db9bd900c1a86-Abstract-Conference.html

    work page 2024

  58. [58]

    Convolutional Sequence to Sequence Learning,

    J. Gehring, M. Auli, D. Grangier, D. Yarats, and Y . N. Dauphin, “Convolutional Sequence to Sequence Learning,” inProceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2017, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 6-11 August 2017, ser. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, D. Precup and Y . W. Teh, Eds., vol. 70. PMLR, 2017, pp. 1243–1252. [Onli...

    work page 2017

  59. [59]

    Quantifying generative model uncertainty in posterior sampling methods for computational imaging,

    C. Ekmekci and M. Cetin, “Quantifying generative model uncertainty in posterior sampling methods for computational imaging,” inConference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), Deep Inverse Workshop. Curran Associates, 2023

    work page 2023

  60. [60]

    Deep bayesian inversion,

    J. Adler and O. ¨Oktem, “Deep bayesian inversion,”Datadriven Models in Inverse Problems, vol. 31, pp. 359–412, 2024

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    Improved denoising diffusion probabilis- tic models,

    A. Q. Nichol and P. Dhariwal, “Improved denoising diffusion probabilis- tic models,” inInternational conference on machine learning. PMLR, 2021, pp. 8162–8171

    work page 2021

  62. [62]

    zea: A Toolbox for Cognitive Ultrasound Imaging,

    T. S. Stevens, W. L. van Nierop, B. Luijten, V . van de Schaft, O. I. Nolan, B. Federici, L. D. van Harten, S. W. Penninga, N. I. Schueler, and R. J. van Sloun, “zea: A Toolbox for Cognitive Ultrasound Imaging,” Jul. 2025. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/tue-bmd/zea

    work page 2025

  63. [63]

    Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis,

    B. Mildenhall, P. P. Srinivasan, M. Tancik, J. T. Barron, R. Ramamoorthi, and R. Ng, “Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis,”Communications of the ACM, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 99–106, 2021

    work page 2021

  64. [64]

    Representing 3d ultrasound with neural fields,

    A. N. Gu, P. Abolmaesumi, C. Luong, and K. M. Yi, “Representing 3d ultrasound with neural fields,” inMedical Imaging with Deep Learning, 2022

    work page 2022

  65. [65]

    Sensorless volumetric reconstruction of fetal brain freehand ultrasound scans with deep implicit representation,

    P.-H. Yeung, L. S. Hesse, M. Aliasi, M. C. Haak, W. Xie, A. I. Nambu- rete, I. 21st Consortiumet al., “Sensorless volumetric reconstruction of fetal brain freehand ultrasound scans with deep implicit representation,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 94, p. 103147, 2024

    work page 2024

  66. [66]

    The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metric,

    R. Zhang, P. Isola, A. A. Efros, E. Shechtman, and O. Wang, “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metric,” in2018 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2018, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, June 18-22, 2018. Computer Vision Foundation / IEEE Computer Society, 2018, pp. 586–595. [Online]. Available: http://ope...

    work page 2018

  67. [67]

    The Perception-distortion Tradeoff,

    Y . Blau and T. Michaeli, “The Perception-distortion Tradeoff,” in 2018 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2018, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, June 18-22, 2018. Computer Vision Foundation / IEEE Computer Society, 2018, pp. 6228–6237. [Online]. Available: http://openaccess.thecvf.com/content cvpr 2018/ html/Blau The Perception-Dist...

    work page 2018

  68. [68]

    Introduction to speckle tracking in cardiac ultrasound imaging,

    D. Garcia, P. Lantelme, and E. Saloux, “Introduction to speckle tracking in cardiac ultrasound imaging,”Handbook of speckle filtering and tracking in cardiovascular ultrasound imaging and video. Institution of Engineering and Technology, pp. 571–598, 2018

    work page 2018

  69. [69]

    Video-based ai for beat-to-beat assessment of cardiac function,

    D. Ouyang, B. He, A. Ghorbani, N. Yuan, J. Ebinger, C. P. Langlotz, P. A. Heidenreich, R. A. Harrington, D. H. Liang, E. A. Ashleyet al., “Video-based ai for beat-to-beat assessment of cardiac function,”Nature, vol. 580, no. 7802, pp. 252–256, 2020

    work page 2020

  70. [70]

    Left ventricular border tracking using cardiac motion models and optical flow,

    K. E. Leung, M. G. Danilouchkine, M. van Stralen, N. de Jong, A. F. van der Steen, and J. G. Bosch, “Left ventricular border tracking using cardiac motion models and optical flow,”Ultrasound in medicine & biology, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 605–616, 2011

    work page 2011

  71. [71]

    Active Inference for Closed-loop transmit beamsteering in Fetal Doppler Ultrasound,

    B. Federici, R. J. G. van Sloun, and M. Mischi, “Active Inference for Closed-loop transmit beamsteering in Fetal Doppler Ultrasound,” CoRR, vol. abs/2410.04869, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/ 10.48550/arXiv.2410.04869

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.04869 2024

  72. [72]

    Active Diffusion Subsampling,

    O. Nolan, T. S. W. Stevens, W. L. van Nierop, and R. van Sloun, “Active Diffusion Subsampling,”Trans. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 2025,

    work page 2025

  73. [73]

    Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=OGifiton47

    [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=OGifiton47

    work page

  74. [74]

    In: IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2022)

    R. Rombach, A. Blattmann, D. Lorenz, P. Esser, and B. Ommer, “High-resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Models,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2022, New Orleans, LA, USA, June 18-24, 2022. IEEE, 2022, pp. 10 674–10 685. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/ CVPR52688.2022.01042

    work page arXiv 2022

  75. [75]

    2024 , url =

    X. Ma, G. Fang, and X. Wang, “DeepCache: Accelerating Diffusion Models for Free,” inIEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2024, Seattle, WA, USA, June 16-22, 2024. IEEE, 2024, pp. 15 762–15 772. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR52733.2024.01492

    work page doi:10.1109/cvpr52733.2024.01492 2024

  76. [76]

    A wearable cardiac ultrasound imager,

    H. Hu, H. Huang, M. Li, X. Gao, L. Yin, R. Qi, R. S. Wu, X. Chen, Y . Ma, K. Shiet al., “A wearable cardiac ultrasound imager,”Nature, vol. 613, no. 7945, pp. 667–675, 2023

    work page 2023