Bi-modality medical images synthesis by a bi-directional discrete process matching method
Zhe Xiong, Qiaoqiao Ding, Xiaoqun Zhang

TL;DR
This paper introduces Bi-DPM, a novel flow-based model that efficiently synthesizes bi-modality medical images by using bidirectional discrete process matching, improving quality and consistency over existing methods.
Contribution
The paper proposes a new bidirectional flow-based model that enhances image synthesis quality and efficiency for bi-modality medical images using paired data guidance.
Findings
Bi-DPM outperforms state-of-the-art flow-based methods in image quality.
The model maintains high anatomical accuracy in synthesized images.
Experiments on MRI and CT datasets validate its effectiveness.
Abstract
Recently, medical image synthesis gains more and more popularity, along with the rapid development of generative models. Medical image synthesis aims to generate an unacquired image modality, often from other observed data modalities. Synthesized images can be used for clinical diagnostic assistance, data augmentation for model training and validation or image quality improving. In the meanwhile, the flow-based models are among the successful generative models for the ability of generating realistic and high-quality synthetic images. However, most flow-based models require to calculate flow ordinary different equation (ODE) evolution steps in synthesis process, for which the performances are significantly limited by heavy computation time due to a large number of time iterations. In this paper, we propose a novel flow-based model, namely bi-directional Discrete Process Matching (Bi-DPM)…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2025
x. Bi-DPM matches intermediate states at discrete time points between forward and backward ODEs, enhancing consistency and allowing high-quality image synthesis that preserves anatomical details. x. Loss function flexibility: The model incorporates a loss function that can handle both fully paired and partially paired datasets using metrics like LPIPS for perceptual similarity and MMD for unpaired data. x. Empirical validation: Experiments conducted on MRI T1/T2 and CT/MRI datasets show that B
x. **Need more elaboration on mathematical derivations**: While I understand the overall purpose of the derivations, some of the deeper mathematical proofs and their implications, like those in Remark 1, could be more thoroughly explained or connected to the practical advantages of the model. x. **Over-argument**: In Section 3.2.4, while the authors present the slicing approach as a straightforward extension of their 2D method, they do not sufficiently explain how this adapts to or addresses th
The method proposes a bi-directional recipe for the flow-matching models. Compared to methods like RF and CFM, the authors propose to constrain the consistency between intermediate states instead of restricting the velocity field to the difference. This allows a non-linear translation, as is shown in Fig. 2 and 3. The 2D toy results shows convincing results on preserving the bi-direction relationship, even with few paired data.
The methodology may have an advantage over RF and CFM, but the authors have picked a bad application scenario. My major concern is the applicability of such methods in medical imaging. Unlike style translation in natural images, anatomy consistency is the utmost crucial factor in translating images between modalities. The MMD in (8) seems to be a very weak constraint for anatomical consistency in unpaired data. Is it even doable to translate medical images? Why can you recover T1/T2 properties o
1. Innovative Approach: This manuscript introduces an innovative flow-based model of medical image synthesis techniques to enhance the consistency on the intermediate images over discrete time steps in flow-based models, which helps maintaining pair information through synthesis process. 2. Significant Empirical Improvements: The method substantially improves PSNR, FID and SSIM scores, demonstrating its effectiveness over existing methods. 3. Detailed Methodological Framework: This manuscript pr
1. This manuscript lacks of sufficient description of the motivation and necessity of using both forward and backward ODE flows, I can’t see the necessity of this operation. The authors may add more detailed description on this. 2. There lacks of implementation details. I would suggest the authors to add some description on their implementation.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMedical Image Segmentation Techniques · Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
