DM4CT: Benchmarking Diffusion Models for Computed Tomography Reconstruction
Jiayang Shi, Daniel M. Pelt, K. Joost Batenburg

TL;DR
This paper introduces DM4CT, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating diffusion models in computed tomography reconstruction, addressing practical challenges and comparing them with traditional methods across diverse datasets.
Contribution
It provides the first systematic benchmark for diffusion models in CT reconstruction, including real experimental data and analysis of their strengths and limitations.
Findings
Diffusion models show competitive performance in CT reconstruction.
Challenges include noise, artifacts, and system geometry dependence.
Benchmark reveals specific strengths and limitations of diffusion-based methods.
Abstract
Diffusion models have recently emerged as powerful priors for solving inverse problems. While computed tomography (CT) is theoretically a linear inverse problem, it poses many practical challenges. These include correlated noise, artifact structures, reliance on system geometry, and misaligned value ranges, which make the direct application of diffusion models more difficult than in domains like natural image generation. To systematically evaluate how diffusion models perform in this context and compare them with established reconstruction methods, we introduce DM4CT, a comprehensive benchmark for CT reconstruction. DM4CT includes datasets from both medical and industrial domains with sparse-view and noisy configurations. To explore the challenges of deploying diffusion models in practice, we additionally acquire a high-resolution CT dataset at a high-energy synchrotron facility and…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Poster
1. As far of my knowledge, this paper provides a first comprehensive benchmark of current SOTA CT reconstruction methods. This benchmark is very comprehensive, consisting of INR-based methods, pixel-diffusion methods, latent-diffusion methods, MBIR methods, traditional methods, and transformer-based methods. 2. The codebase is maintained very well and easy to use. The code is easy to follow and I can switch between different methods. The code style is great and different classes of methods are s
1. Including some GAN-based methods will strengthen this paper. If authors have time, I would also encourage trying some Gaussian splat based methods as these methods are gaining more popularity recently. 2. If authors have time, I am also interested in the performance of flow-based methods, such as FlowDPS or so on. 3. I would encourage the authors to fine tune from some pretrained autoencoder, specifically that from SDXL or SD3, instead of training from scratch, as training from scratch may l
The paper presents a comprehensive and well-organized summary and comparison of nine existing algorithms within the domain. 1 All the nine methods were evaluated and extensive experiments were performed. The paper gives comparison with other method and the quantitive result. 2 Comparison and comprehension of nine diffusion-based methods were given. Every dataset was evaluated with different configuration. 3 A high-resolution synchrotron dataset was provided. The dataset is a new dataset for
1 Lack of Novelty and Original Contribution: The paper primarily focuses on summarizing, comparing, and reproducing results of existing algorithms. The paper gives the result and summary of different papers. The main work is the running and comparison of different method. There is not any new design of the model. 2 Limited new understanding for future research of diffusion model in CT reconstruction. Better suited for publication as a survey paper or technical report. 3. More details of the hi
- **Comprehensive and impressive baselines.** The range of baselines included is remarkably complete, even surprisingly so. The authors compare not only traditional iterative methods but also a large set of mainstream DM-based inverse solvers, including those not originally designed for CT reconstruction. They further include state-of-the-art supervised models and even classical self-supervised methods such as DIP and INR. This level of comprehensiveness greatly enhances the paper’s value and
1. **Small-scale training data.** Although the authors trained both latent and pixel diffusion models within a unified Diffuser framework, a major concern is the extremely small size of the training datasets. Even the largest dataset, AAPM 2016, contains only about 5,000 slices. In contrast, diffusion models used in natural image inverse problems are typically trained on datasets like ImageNet, which contain millions of images. Models trained on such small data are likely to overfit or memoriz
Code & Models
- 🤗jiayangshi/lodochallenge_pixel_diffusionmodel· 1 dl1 dl
- 🤗jiayangshi/lodochallenge_latent_diffusionmodel· 18 dl18 dl
- 🤗jiayangshi/lodoind_pixel_diffusionmodel· 5 dl5 dl
- 🤗jiayangshi/lodoind_latent_diffusionmodel· 19 dl19 dl
- 🤗jiayangshi/synchrotron_pixel_diffusionmodel· 4 dl4 dl
- 🤗jiayangshi/synchrotron_latent_diffusionmodel· 15 dl15 dl
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications · Advanced X-ray Imaging Techniques · Markov Chains and Monte Carlo Methods
