PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 2, 20250 citationsOpen Access

PanoDiff-SR: Synthesizing Dental Panoramic Radiographs using Diffusion and Super-resolution

View Full Paper
SJSanyam JainBFBruna Neves de FreitasABAndreas Basse-OConnor

Key Points

  • The use of diffusion and super-resolution techniques produced synthetic dental panoramic radiographs with a Frechet inception distance score of 40.69, suggesting high quality of generated images.
  • Inception scores indicate improved quality with scores of 2.55 for real high-resolution images and 2.30 for synthetic high-resolution images, supporting the effectiveness of the proposed method.
  • Evaluations by six clinical experts revealed an average accuracy of 68.5% in distinguishing between synthetic and real panoramic radiographs, implying potential for educational applications.
  • This method addresses challenges in obtaining public datasets for artificial intelligence research in medical imaging, highlighting its significance for the field.

Abstract

There has been increasing interest in the generation of high-quality, realistic synthetic medical images in recent years. Such synthetic datasets can mitigate the scarcity of public datasets for artificial intelligence research, and can also be used for educational purposes. In this paper, we propose a combination of diffusion-based generation (PanoDiff) and Super-Resolution (SR) for generating synthetic dental panoramic radiographs (PRs). The former generates a low-resolution (LR) seed of a PR (256 X 128) which is then processed by the SR model to yield a high-resolution (HR) PR of size 1024 X 512. For SR, we propose a state-of-the-art transformer that learns local-global relationships, resulting in sharper edges and textures. Experimental results demonstrate a Frechet inception distance score of 40.69 between 7243 real and synthetic images (in HR). Inception scores were 2.55, 2.30, 2.90 and 2.98 for real HR, synthetic HR, real LR and synthetic LR images, respectively. Among a diverse group of six clinical experts, all evaluating a mixture of 100 synthetic and 100 real PRs in a time-limited observation, the average accuracy in distinguishing real from synthetic images was 68.5% (with 50% corresponding to random guessing).

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Jain et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68de5d9c83cbc991d0a20609https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2507.09227
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper