Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Tobit Klug
dblp:330/2923
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
3since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 first-author · 3 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Computer graphics and multimedia
3 papers |
Image and video processing · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
3 papers |
3D vision · 54% Deep learning architectures and training · 23% Learning theory · 23% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Image and video processing
image reconstruction |
1.6 | 3 | 2024 | MotionTTT: 2D Test-Time-Training Motion Estimation for 3D Motion Corrected MRI · NeurIPS 2024 Analyzing the Sample Complexity of Self-Supervised Image Reconstruction Methods · NeurIPS 2023 Scaling Laws For Deep Learning Based Image Reconstruction · ICLR 2023 |
Computer vision › 3D vision
motion estimation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | MotionTTT: 2D Test-Time-Training Motion Estimation for 3D Motion Corrected MRI · NeurIPS 2024 |
Computer vision › 3D vision › motion estimation
rigid motion estimation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | MotionTTT: 2D Test-Time-Training Motion Estimation for 3D Motion Corrected MRI · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
sample complexity |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Analyzing the Sample Complexity of Self-Supervised Image Reconstruction Methods · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
scaling laws |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Scaling Laws For Deep Learning Based Image Reconstruction · ICLR 2023 |
Image and video processing › image restoration
image denoising |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Analyzing the Sample Complexity of Self-Supervised Image Reconstruction Methods · NeurIPS 2023 |
Image and video processing › image reconstruction › learned image reconstruction
self-supervised image reconstruction |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Analyzing the Sample Complexity of Self-Supervised Image Reconstruction Methods · NeurIPS 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
deep learning · 2.8test-time training · 1.5unbiased gradient estimation · 1.3noise2noise · 1.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | MotionTTT: 2D Test-Time-Training Motion Estimation for 3D Motion Corrected MRIabstractA major challenge of the long measurement times in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), an important medical imaging technology, is that patients may move during data acquisition. This leads to severe motion artifacts in the reconstructed images and volumes. In this paper, we propose MotionTTT a deep learning-based test-time-training (TTT) method for accurate motion estimation. The key idea is that a neural network trained for motion-free reconstruction has a small loss if there is no motion, thus optimizing over motion parameters passed through the reconstruction network enables accurate estimation of motion. The estimated motion parameters enable to correct for the motion and to reconstruct accurate motion-corrected images. Our method uses 2D reconstruction networks to estimate rigid motion in 3D, and constitutes the first deep learning based method for 3D rigid motion estimation towards 3D-motion-corrected MRI. We show that our method can provably reconstruct motion parameters for a simple signal and neural network model. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method for both retrospectively simulated motion and prospectively collected real motion-corrupted data. Code is available at \url{https://github.com/MLI-lab/MRI_MotionTTT}. Tobit Klug, Stefan Ruschke, Reinhard Heckel |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2023 | Scaling Laws For Deep Learning Based Image Reconstruction
Tobit Klug, Reinhard Heckel |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2023 | Analyzing the Sample Complexity of Self-Supervised Image Reconstruction MethodsabstractSupervised training of deep neural networks on pairs of clean image and noisy measurement achieves state-of-the-art performance for many image reconstruction tasks, but such training pairs are difficult to collect. Self-supervised methods enable training based on noisy measurements only, without clean images. In this work, we investigate the cost of self-supervised training in terms of sample complexity for a class of self-supervised methods that enable the computation of unbiased estimates of gradients of the supervised loss, including noise2noise methods. We analytically show that a model trained with such self-supervised training is as good as the same model trained in a supervised fashion, but self-supervised training requires more examples than supervised training. We then study self-supervised denoising and accelerated MRI empirically and characterize the cost of self-supervised training in terms of the number of additional samples required, and find that the performance gap between self-supervised and supervised training vanishes as a function of the training examples, at a problem-dependent rate, as predicted by our theory. Tobit Klug, Dogukan Atik, Reinhard Heckel |
NeurIPS | 1 |