Original Article
MR image reconstruction using deep learning: evaluation of network structure and loss functions
Abstract
Background: To review and evaluate approaches to convolutional neural network (CNN) reconstruction for accelerated cardiac MR imaging in the real clinical context.
Methods: Two CNN architectures, Unet and residual network (Resnet) were evaluated using quantitative and qualitative assessment by radiologist. Four different loss functions were also considered: pixel-wise (L1 and L2), patch-wise structural dissimilarity (Dssim) and feature-wise (perceptual loss). The networks were evaluated using retrospectively and prospectively under-sampled cardiac MR data.
Results: Based on our assessments, we find that Resnet and Unet achieve similar image quality but that former requires only 100,000 parameters compared to 1.3 million parameters for the latter. The perceptual loss function performed significantly better than L1, L2 or Dssim loss functions as determined by the radiologist scores.
Conclusions: CNN image reconstruction using Resnet yields comparable image quality to Unet with 10X the number of parameters. This has implications for training with significantly lower data requirements. Network training using the perceptual loss function was found to better agree with radiologist scoring compared to L1, L2 or Dssim loss functions.
Methods: Two CNN architectures, Unet and residual network (Resnet) were evaluated using quantitative and qualitative assessment by radiologist. Four different loss functions were also considered: pixel-wise (L1 and L2), patch-wise structural dissimilarity (Dssim) and feature-wise (perceptual loss). The networks were evaluated using retrospectively and prospectively under-sampled cardiac MR data.
Results: Based on our assessments, we find that Resnet and Unet achieve similar image quality but that former requires only 100,000 parameters compared to 1.3 million parameters for the latter. The perceptual loss function performed significantly better than L1, L2 or Dssim loss functions as determined by the radiologist scores.
Conclusions: CNN image reconstruction using Resnet yields comparable image quality to Unet with 10X the number of parameters. This has implications for training with significantly lower data requirements. Network training using the perceptual loss function was found to better agree with radiologist scoring compared to L1, L2 or Dssim loss functions.
