Cited by 3Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsBrain Tumor Detection and Classification

IterMask3D: Unsupervised anomaly detection and segmentation with test-time iterative mask refinement in 3D brain MRI

Open access
Liang, Ziyun, Guo, Xiaoqing, Xu, Wentian, Ibrahim, Yasin, Voets, Natalie, Pretorius, Pieter M., Noble, J. Alison, Kamnitsas, Konstantinos·2026·Medical Image Analysis

Abstract

Unsupervised anomaly detection and segmentation methods train a model to learn the training distribution as 'normal'. In the testing phase, they identify patterns that deviate from this normal distribution as 'anomalies'. To learn the 'normal' distribution, prevailing methods corrupt the images and train a model to reconstruct them. During testing, the model attempts to reconstruct corrupted inputs based on the learned 'normal' distribution. Deviations from this distribution lead to high reconstruction errors, which indicate potential anomalies. However, corrupting an input image inevitably causes information loss even in normal regions, leading to suboptimal reconstruction and an increased risk of false positives. To alleviate this, we propose IterMask3D, an iterative spatial mask-refining strategy designed for 3D brain MRI. We iteratively spatially mask areas of the image as corruption and reconstruct them, then shrink the mask based on reconstruction error. This process iteratively unmasks 'normal' areas to the model, whose information further guides reconstruction of 'normal' patterns under the mask to be reconstructed accurately, reducing false positives. In addition, to achieve better reconstruction performance, we also propose using high-frequency image content as additional structural information to guide the reconstruction of the masked area. Extensive experiments on the detection of both synthetic and real-world imaging artifacts, as well as segmentation of various pathological lesions across multiple MRI sequences, consistently demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed method. Code is available at https://github.com/ZiyunLiang/IterMask3D.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.media.2025.103763

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Still being checked.

Authors
Liang, Z., Guo, X., Xu, W., Ibrahim, Y., Voets, N., Pretorius, P. M., Noble, J. A., & Kamnitsas, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Hong Kong Baptist University (HK)
Corresponding author
Kamnitsas, Konstantinos
Venue
Medical Image Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2026-01
Volume
107
Issue
Pt A
Pages
103763
ISSN
1361-8415 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4413787196
Cited by
3
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 3
FWCI
1.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medical Image Analysis (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/S02428X/1, EP/W524311/1, EP/T028572/1)
  • Wellcome Trust (203139/A/16/Z, 203139/Z/16/Z)
  • NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
  • UK Research and Innovation (EP/X040186/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
Keywords
unsupervised anomaly detection, brain MRI, 3D MRI, spatial masking, reconstruction-based anomaly detection, false positive reduction, image artifacts
MeSH terms
Unsupervised Machine Learning, Algorithms, Brain, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Imaging, Three-Dimensional

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review