analiza aiqbench
This systematic ablation study isolates the drivers of performance in deep learning medical image registration, revealing that regularization losses are the primary factor behind accuracy gains and deformation control. The findings demonstrate that these objective-based enhancements deliver significant improvements with negligible computational overhead at inference time, whereas architectural additions provide only a complementary benefit. For researchers optimizing registration pipelines, this suggests prioritizing loss function design over complex network modifications to achieve clinical-grade anatomical plausibility.
Architectural and Regularization Components in Deep Learning Medical Image Registration: Systematic Ablation Study
arXiv:2609.05484v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deep learning registration methods routinely stack two kinds of enhancement on a base network: architectural additions such as affine pre-alignment stages, and training-objective additions such as regularization losses. Papers tend to adopt both at once, so it is unclear which is doing the work. I ran a controlled ablation to separate them. Using the OASIS brain MRI dataset (394 training subjects, 20 test subjects), I trained four variants of the same registration pipeline: a baseline 3D U-Net with basic similarity losses, the same U-Net with a full regularization suite, an affine-plus-deformable architecture with basic losses, and the affine architecture with the full suite. I evaluated registration accuracy (MSE, NCC, SSIM), deformation quality (Jacobian determinant preservation, displacement statistics, an anatomical plausibility score), and computational cost. Regularization alone accounted for most of the gain: a 21.3% relative gain on the MSE-improvement metric (1.78% to 2.16%, P<.001) and a 21.8% relative gain in NCC improvement, while cutting maximum deformation from 53.1 to 0.51 units, a 99.0% reduction, at essentially no computational cost (-0.06% inference time). The combined model produced the largest accuracy gain, 25.8% (1.78% to 2.24%), and raised anatomical plausibility from 0.596 to 0.930, at a moderate +9.8% inference-time cost. Gradient correlation rose from 0.742 at baseline to 0.980 for the fully enhanced model. All enhanced variants reached sub-voxel accuracy under plausible deformation constraints. Regularization losses are the primary driver in this setting, delivering the accuracy gains and almost all of the deformation control for free at inference time, while the affine architecture adds a smaller complementary benefit at acceptable cost. The 99% reduction in unrealistic deformations addresses a known barrier to clinical deployment.
Abstract:Deep learning registration methods routinely stack two kinds of enhancement on a base network: architectural additions such as affine pre-alignment stages, and training-objective additions such as regularization losses. Papers tend to adopt both at once, so it is unclear which is doing the work. I ran a controlled ablation to separate them. Using the OASIS brain MRI dataset (394 training subjects, 20 test subjects), I trained four variants of the same registration pipeline: a baseline 3D U-Net with basic similarity losses, the same U-Net with a full regularization suite, an affine-plus-deformable architecture with basic losses, and the affine architecture with the full suite. I evaluated registration accuracy (MSE, NCC, SSIM), deformation quality (Jacobian determinant preservation, displacement statistics, an anatomical plausibility score), and computational cost. Regularization alone accounted for most of the gain: a 21.3% relative gain on the MSE-improvement metric (1.78% to 2.16%, P<.001) and a 21.8% relative gain in NCC improvement, while cutting maximum deformation from 53.1 to 0.51 units, a 99.0% reduction, at essentially no computational cost (-0.06% inference time). The combined model produced the largest accuracy gain, 25.8% (1.78% to 2.24%), and raised anatomical plausibility from 0.596 to 0.930, at a moderate +9.8% inference-time cost. Gradient correlation rose from 0.742 at baseline to 0.980 for the fully enhanced model. All enhanced variants reached sub-voxel accuracy under plausible deformation constraints. Regularization losses are the primary driver in this setting, delivering the accuracy gains and almost all of the deformation control for free at inference time, while the affine architecture adds a smaller complementary benefit at acceptable cost. The 99% reduction in unrealistic deformations addresses a known barrier to clinical deployment.
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.05484 [cs.CV]
(or arXiv:2609.05484v1 [cs.CV] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.05484 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 372 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Do emulated quantum circuits change what CNNs look at? Performance and explainability comparison in medical image classification
arXiv · 28 iul. 2026
Tariffs didn’t bring manufacturing jobs back to the US
The Verge · 27 iul. 2026
Input-Dependent Fisher Information for Local Sensitivity Analysis of Medical Image Classifiers
arXiv · 16 iun. 2026
Federated Learning Framework for Privacy-Preserving Kidney Stone Detection
arXiv · 18 sept. 2026