GRIG: Data-Efficient Generative Residual Image Inpainting
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 is the task of filling in missing or masked regions of an image with semantically meaningful content. Recent methods have shown significant improvement in dealing with large missing regions. However, these methods usually require large training datasets to achieve satisfactory results, and there has been limited research into training such models on a small number of samples. To address this, we present a novel data-efficient generative residual image inpainting method that produces high-quality inpainting results. The core idea is to use an iterative residual reasoning method that incorporates convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for feature extraction and transformers for global reasoning within generative adversarial networks, along with image-level and patch-level discriminators. We also propose a novel forged-patch adversarial training strategy to create faithful textures and detailed appearances. Extensive evaluation shows that our method outperforms previous methods on the data-efficient image inpainting task, both quantitatively and qualitatively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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