ECCV 2026

Rethinking Real-World MRI Denoising:
Learning from Physical Noise

Sebastian Rassmann, David Kügler, Sascha Brunheim, Philipp Ehses, Martin Reuter

German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Bonn, Germany
Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Boston, USA
Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) inherently suffers from noise, which limits downstream medical analyses. In MRI, noise-free images are unobtainable; therefore, existing denoising approaches formulate surrogate training objectives, compromising between preserving detail and concealing noise, causing domain shifts or incomplete denoising. To enable denoiser training directly on unmodified, noisy images, we exploit repeated acquisitions. This naturally constitutes a physical Noise2Noise (pN2N) setting. For unrepeated data, we introduce a diffusion-based re-noiser that synthesizes noisy image pairs, extending pN2N to Renoise2Noise (ReN2N). Furthermore, we demonstrate that ReN2N improves generalization to unseen datasets. Additionally, we propose to combine pN2N or ReN2N with optional guidance from co-acquired contrast, yielding four versions of our novel denoising framework: YADO (You Accurately Denoise real Observations). Across 14 test conditions, YADO consistently outperforms 17 state-of-the-art baselines, matching the quality of physically noise-suppressed images obtained via brute-force averaging of independent acquisitions. YADO thus establishes practical denoising for real-world acquisition settings.

Also presented in the ECCV MedFM-Bench workshop: Poster.

YADO visual overview: physical Noise2Noise and Renoise2Noise denoising framework
Rethinking Brain MRI Denoising: a) While traditional denoiser training relies on degradation (N2Void: blind-spot masking or Noisier2Noise/Ner2N: noising), b) we propose to use physical repeats for physical N2N (pN2N) training. c) We further generalize pN2N to single-noisy data by renoising images (ReN2N) using a diffusion model. b,c) When available, co-acquired contrasts can guide (g) YADO (pN2N- or ReN2N-trained, 4 variants total), which increases total information over unguided (u) denoising. d) All YADO versions achieve unprecedented image quality from routine scans, matching the details of physically noise-suppressed reference images (here: average of NEx=7 acquisitions).

Background

What does MRI "Denoising" actually mean?

While acquired images are often assumed or defined to be clean, they are not: If we re-acquire an image, it will look different every time. This is the whole point of denoising.

In-session reacquisitions of a routine 0.8mm MPRAGE, showing thermal noise
In-session reacquisitions of a routine 0.8 mm MPRAGE (following the Rhineland Study)

Every MRI is noisy — there is no "clean" MRI in the real world.

Thus, we have to treat the acquisition of an MRI Xt as a random process. Here we model image formation as:

Hence, we assume X′ = E[X] as the (surrogate, inaccessible) clean image *We thus incorporate all systematic effects like the Rician bias or undersampling artifacts into the noise.. This definition is inspired by, and thus theoretically grounded in, the only way to approximate the clean image X′, which is brute-force averaging:

Brute-force averaging of many acquisitions results in pseudo-clean images
Brute-force averaging of NEx ≫ 1 (Here: NEx = 8) images results in pseudo-clean images (SNR ∝ √NEx)

Denoising is therefore the task of recovering X′ given a noisy Xin, i.e. finding such that:

How previous works framed denoising

Many previous works relied on the assumption that acquired images are clean, then added synthetic AWGN (or Rician noise) and removed it — i.e. something like:

This is valid for training (cf. Noisier2Noise), yet, evaluating for this task does not actually test real-world noise removal and can severely bias denoiser evaluation. (Note also that real-world MRI noise is somewhat Gaussian but not white due to interpolation, CS artifacts, motion etc.)

Thus, we had to re-think the task to actually remove the physical noise (nt) as modeled above — and evaluate for it!

Results

Matching NEx=7 (TA=45 min) quality from routine MRI

Visual comparison of denoising performance of 4 YADO variants from routine Rhineland (single-acquisition, NEx=1) T1w scans to physically noise-suppressed (NEx=7, >45 min scan time) reference images.

1 mm — OASIS-3 trained
0.8 mm — HCP-A trained

Use slider to compare, click the zoom in (click the zoom badge to reset)

1 mm — OASIS-3 trained
Click to expand: All 17 baseline methods (1 mm)
0.8 mm — HCP-A trained
Click to expand: All 17 baseline methods (0.8 mm)

Benchmark

Quantitative Results

SSIM (%) and CNR against 17 state-of-the-art baselines for T1w denoising, evaluated on models trained on OASIS-3 (ca. 1.0 mm) and HCP-A (0.8 mm).

Test dataset Venue OASIS-3 trained (ca. 1.0 mm) HCP-A trained (0.8 mm) Rank
(all)
SSIM (%) *Based on repeated data to evaluate removal of true, physical noise. CNR SSIM (%) *Based on repeated data to evaluate removal of true, physical noise. CNR
OAS3CHDIKirbyHCP-E-YA RS PVS HCP-E-YA RS PVS
uYADO (pN2N)ECCV '26
(proposed)
89.3994.2595.6989.6594.0693.832.63 87.0585.8590.442.15 4.55
uYADO (ReN2N) 89.4194.3395.9990.6094.5094.372.74 88.2586.6691.232.32 2.09
gYADO (pN2N) 90.0394.11(94.63)89.9694.1194.312.85 86.8786.0589.932.25 4.17
gYADO (ReN2N) 89.7794.59(95.63)90.9194.5994.592.85 88.7486.9891.692.29 1.46
Noisier2NCVPR '20 88.5993.5395.5889.4793.9193.422.28 84.6382.6588.452.10 9.26
N2ScoreNeurIPS '21 89.0793.7795.2187.8993.6192.751.06 79.9765.7190.241.71 12.24
N2VoidCVPR '19 88.6093.7895.7288.1990.8692.632.24 86.9985.1490.112.20 8.58
S-N2VoidISBI '20 88.6993.6795.5988.4391.3892.622.17 87.4285.8990.562.22 7.81
Neigh2NeighCVPR '21 87.9493.0394.5989.0893.6192.682.31 87.3685.4089.631.83 9.75
RED-WGANMedIA '19 86.3591.3893.4287.2189.4890.492.18 84.7083.5388.341.88 15.35
CNN3DMedIA '19 87.7993.0095.1188.8692.6292.622.25 86.2884.5189.311.95 11.62
DDM²ICLR '23 51.0543.0439.2935.1539.4948.270.16 23.6430.2539.820.02 22.00
DDM² Reg. *Applying single-step regression sampling as previously introduced with YODA.ICLR '23 87.2891.1492.7384.1089.8091.281.76 72.2475.2884.411.01 17.70
BME-XNat. BE '25 83.1087.8186.6482.8788.3888.051.55 82.7182.1788.141.56 18.68
N2ContrastIPMI '23 87.3293.1295.3487.9890.4692.162.42 85.5183.3988.972.12 11.82
YODATMI '26 88.2987.95(70.80)83.4886.8789.182.17 71.1980.1184.171.69 17.30
DIPCVPR '18 87.8793.2795.3189.0492.2392.882.33 86.7784.8689.581.97 9.84
Pixel2PixelTPAMI '25 85.7690.8192.1687.2091.3990.231.41 86.2083.8787.941.21 16.46
ANTs NLMJMRI '10 87.8993.1194.9788.9593.2192.622.36 87.2285.4289.731.91 9.49
BM4DTIP '12 88.2893.4095.3389.3793.7192.932.13 87.8186.0990.271.83 7.96
BME-X (as-is)Nat. BE '25 52.7255.3955.4846.4768.4153.131.53 35.3368.8564.451.53 20.52
Identityproposed*While the operation is — of course — trivial, we are not aware of any prior works comparing trained denoisers against the Identity function. 86.9192.6695.0387.0989.5091.602.33 84.6182.6888.472.10 14.35
bold — best or statistically tied (p≥5%, Wilcoxon, Bonferroni-corrected) gray — not significantly better than Identity (parentheses) — guidance with anisotropic/low-quality T2w

T2w/FLAIR: SSIM (%) and CNR (RS-trained, 0.8 mm), plus WMH lesion-segmentation F1 agreement on FLAIR (via SHIVA). We only evaluated representative, well-performing methods from T1w denoising.

Test dataset Venue RS-trained T2w (0.8 mm) RS-trained FLAIR (0.8 mm) Rank
(all)
SSIM (%) *Based on repeated data to evaluate removal of true, physical noise. CNR SSIM (%) *Based on repeated data to evaluate removal of true, physical noise. CNR F1
RS HCP-E-YA PVS RS stillnoddWMHWMH
uYADO (pN2N)ECCV '26
(proposed)
88.8090.2189.502.69 88.3684.8973.843.1461.58 5.60
uYADO (ReN2N) 88.5891.1089.762.59 88.2584.9473.883.0861.02 4.60
gYADO (pN2N) 89.6590.3889.243.12 89.60(69.94)(62.75)3.4064.23 3.55
gYADO (ReN2N) 88.9891.4390.282.91 89.28(59.29)(52.94)3.3362.42 3.63
Noisier2NCVPR '20 87.0090.2388.582.21 85.7883.2170.283.3462.82 7.65
S-N2VCVPR '19 87.6990.8389.262.38 86.6083.5871.453.3662.75 5.52
DIPCVPR '18 87.4490.9589.792.29 87.0483.9071.123.2862.68 5.30
ANTs NLMJMRI '10 86.7690.2789.052.32 87.2083.5272.803.3762.89 6.00
BM4DTIP '12 87.2890.9389.682.52 87.7684.5173.873.2162.83 4.74
Identityproposed*While the operation is — of course — trivial, we are not aware of any prior works comparing trained denoisers against the Identity function. 86.9990.1488.522.22 85.7383.1870.273.3762.45 8.41
bold — best or statistically tied (p≥5%, Wilcoxon, Bonferroni-corrected) gray — not significantly better than Identity bold+gray — statistically tied for best, yet also not sig. better than Identity (parentheses) — synthesis/guidance with anisotropic/low-quality T2w

YADO for FLAIR & T2w denoising

We also trained YADO versions for FLAIR and T2w denoising, thus, covering all main structural contrasts.

FLAIR denoising
Click to expand: baseline methods (FLAIR)
T2w denoising
Click to expand: baseline methods (T2w)

OOD Performance

Beyond routine, in-distribution scans, we tested YADO on several (severely) OOD images:

Huntington's disease (CHDI)
Input CHDI (Huntington's disease) input, single acquisition
YADO CHDI (Huntington's disease) denoised with YADO

Huntington's disease alters brain structure causing severe atrophy and results in involuntary motion which can induce severe motion artifacts during MRI. See more results in the paper.

7T MP2RAGE @ 0.5 mm
Input 7T input, single acquisition
YADO 7T denoised with YADO (uReN2N)

Applying 3T HCP (0.8 mm MPRAGE) to ultra-high-field MP2RAGE at 0.5 mm.

Glioma & T1ce (BraTS)
T1w
T2w
FLAIR
T1ce
Input BraTS glioma, T1w input
Input BraTS glioma, T2w input
Input BraTS glioma, FLAIR input
Input BraTS glioma, contrast-enhanced T1w input
YADO BraTS glioma, T1w denoised with YADO
YADO BraTS glioma, T2w denoised with YADO
YADO BraTS glioma, FLAIR denoised with YADO
YADO BraTS glioma, contrast-enhanced T1w denoised with YADO

Although trained on (predominantly) healthy participants and with non-enhanced MPRAGE, YADO can handle tumor cases and contrast-enhanced T1w images.

Monkey brain 🐒
Input Monkey brain input, single acquisition
YADO Monkey brain denoised with YADO
Reference
NEx=4
Monkey brain reference, N_Ex=4

Human-trained YADO also generalizes to monkey brain, i.e. denoising is not tied to human-only priors.

Cite

BibTeX

@inproceedings{rassmann2026yado,
  title     = {Rethinking Real-World MRI Denoising: Learning from Physical Noise},
  author    = {Rassmann, Sebastian and K\"ugler, David and Brunheim, Sascha and Ehses, Philipp and Reuter, Martin},
  booktitle = {European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV)},
  year      = {2026}
}