PURPOSE: To advance research in the field of machine learning for MR image reconstruction with an open challenge. METHODS: We provided participants with a dataset of raw k-space data from 1,594 consecutive clinical exams of the knee. The goal of the challenge was to reconstruct images from these data. In order to strike a balance between realistic data and a shallow learning curve for those not already familiar with MR image reconstruction, we ran multiple tracks for multi-coil and single-coil data. We performed a two-stage evaluation based on quantitative image metrics followed by evaluation by a panel of radiologists. The challenge ran from June to December of 2019. RESULTS: We received a total of 33 challenge submissions. All participants chose to submit results from supervised machine learning approaches. CONCLUSIONS: The challenge led to new developments in machine learning for image reconstruction, provided insight into the current state of the art in the field, and highlighted remaining hurdles for clinical adoption.
PURPOSE: To advance research in the field of machine learning for MR image reconstruction with an open challenge. METHODS: We provided participants with a dataset of raw k-space data from 1,594 consecutive clinical exams of the knee. The goal of the challenge was to reconstruct images from these data. In order to strike a balance between realistic data and a shallow learning curve for those not already familiar with MR image reconstruction, we ran multiple tracks for multi-coil and single-coil data. We performed a two-stage evaluation based on quantitative image metrics followed by evaluation by a panel of radiologists. The challenge ran from June to December of 2019. RESULTS: We received a total of 33 challenge submissions. All participants chose to submit results from supervised machine learning approaches. CONCLUSIONS: The challenge led to new developments in machine learning for image reconstruction, provided insight into the current state of the art in the field, and highlighted remaining hurdles for clinical adoption.
Authors: Mark A Griswold; Martin Blaimer; Felix Breuer; Robin M Heidemann; Matthias Mueller; Peter M Jakob Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Hu Chen; Yi Zhang; Mannudeep K Kalra; Feng Lin; Yang Chen; Peixi Liao; Jiliu Zhou; Ge Wang Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2017-06-13 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Kerstin Hammernik; Teresa Klatzer; Erich Kobler; Michael P Recht; Daniel K Sodickson; Thomas Pock; Florian Knoll Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-11-08 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Florian Knoll; Kerstin Hammernik; Erich Kobler; Thomas Pock; Michael P Recht; Daniel K Sodickson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Martin Uecker; Peng Lai; Mark J Murphy; Patrick Virtue; Michael Elad; John M Pauly; Shreyas S Vasanawala; Michael Lustig Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Dominik Narnhofer; Alexander Effland; Erich Kobler; Kerstin Hammernik; Florian Knoll; Thomas Pock Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2022-02-02 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Akshay S Chaudhari; Christopher M Sandino; Elizabeth K Cole; David B Larson; Garry E Gold; Shreyas S Vasanawala; Matthew P Lungren; Brian A Hargreaves; Curtis P Langlotz Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2020-08-24 Impact factor: 5.119