Image Inpainting Based on Generative Adversarial Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Image inpainting aims to fill missing regions of a damaged image with plausibly synthesized content. Existing methods for image inpainting either fill the missing regions by borrowing information from surrounding areas or generating semantically coherent content from region context. They often produce ambiguous or semantically incoherent content when the missing region is large or with complex structures. In this paper, we present an approach for image inpainting. The completion model based on our proposed algorithm contains one generator, one global discriminator, and one local discriminator. The generator is responsible for inpainting the missing area, the global discriminator aims evaluating whether the repair result has global consistency, and the local discriminator is responsible for identifying whether the repair area is correct. The architecture of the generator is an auto-encoder. We use the skip-connection in the generator to improve the prediction power of the model. Also, we use Wasserstein GAN loss to ensure the stability of training. Experiments on CelebA dataset and LFW dataset demonstrate that our proposed model can deal with large-scale missing pixels and generate realistic completion results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it