Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41028882›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

An effective image despeckling and reconstruction approach using U-Net based model and comparative analysis.

M S Gokmen, Bilgehan Arslan, C Bumgardner, A Imran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

M S GokmenComputer Science Department, University of Kentucky, Lexington, 40506, USA.
Bilgehan ArslanComputer Engineering Department, Gazi University, 06570, Ankara, Turkey. bilgehanarslan@gazi.edu.tr.
C BumgardnerComputer Science Department, University of Kentucky, Lexington, 40506, USA.
A ImranComputer Science Department, University of Kentucky, Lexington, 40506, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

U-Net-based deep learning models have garnered significant attention in recent years due to their strong denoising capabilities in image restoration tasks. This study critically evaluates both the strengths and limitations of these models, with a particular focus on their architectural design and constituent components, in an effort to further advance denoising performance. Based on the insights derived from these analyses, a novel architecture-termed U-Tunnel-Net-is proposed. The model is trained on the UNS and Waterloo datasets, each augmented with Rayleigh-distributed speckle noise at four distinct intensity levels (σ = 0.10, 0.25, 0.50, and 0.75), and evaluated on the UNS, BSD68, and Set12 datasets. Performance assessment is conducted using peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR), structural similarity index (SSIM), and runtime as evaluation metrics. Leveraging a novel network design strategy and a newly introduced convolutional block, U-Tunnel-Net consistently achieves superior performance compared to other U-Net-based denoising models. A key architectural innovation lies in the repositioning of the pooling operation within the Tunnel Blocks, which differentiates the proposed model from conventional U-Net variants. Experimental results on both benchmark and real-world datasets confirm that U-Tunnel-Net outperforms several state-of-the-art denoising methods.

Indexed as

Biomedical image processingDeep learningDenoisingGaussian noiseSpeckleUltrasoundU-Net

Identifiers

PMID41028882
PMCPMC12484726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.