Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

C-DiffSET: Leveraging Latent Diffusion for SAR-to-EO Image Translation with Confidence-Guided Reliable Object Generation

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper aims to establish that a pretrained latent diffusion model, fine-tuned with a confidence-weighted loss, is the strongest SAR-to-EO translator, because its frozen VAE embeds radar and optical images in one shared latent space.

desk verdict A plausible recipe for SAR-to-EO translation by fine-tuning Stable Diffusion, with a confidence-weighted loss that is clever but not yet shown to measure what it claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.10788 v3 pith:FJHPGGPB submitted 2024-11-16 cs.CV eess.IV

Jeonghyeok Do , Jaehyup Lee , Munchurl Kim This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVeess.IV
keywords SAR-to-EOimagetranslationlatentdiffusionmodelconfidence-guidedtemporaldiscrepancyhandlingimage-to-imageremotesensinggenerativefine-tuninguncertaintyestimation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

C-DiffSET is a framework for translating Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery into Electro-Optical (EO) color imagery. The paper sets out to prove that a latent diffusion model pretrained on natural images can be fine-tuned for this task despite scarce SAR-EO pairs, because the frozen VAE places both modalities in the same latent space. To handle the fact that objects such as ships may appear or disappear between the SAR and EO acquisition times, the U-Net also predicts a pixel-wise confidence map that down-weights unreliable regions in the diffusion loss. The authors report state-of-the-art results on QXS-SAROPT, SAR2Opt, and SpaceNet6, beating recent translation methods and SET methods by large margins on FID, LPIPS, SSIM, SCC, and PSNR.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the confidence-guided diffusion (C-Diff) loss, adapted from $eta$-NLL regression losses. During training the U-Net emits both the predicted noise $\hat{\epsilon}_t$ and a per-pixel confidence map $\hat{c}_t$ (passed through SoftPlus); the loss is $\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{C\text{-}Diff}} = \left\|(\epsilon-\hat{\epsilon}_t)\odot \hat{c}_t^\beta - \log \hat{c}_t^\beta + \tau\right\|^2$, with $\beta=1$ and $\tau=\log 2\pi$. The $\odot$ term makes high-confidence pixels dominate the fit; the log term prevents collapse to zero; the map is supposed to localize temporal discrepancies. The other pillar is the observation that the frozen VAE embeds SAR and EO in the same latent space, so SAR latents can condition the reverse diffusion with pixel-wise correspondence.

What would settle it

A falsifying test: on a paired SAR-EO set with known ground-truth change masks, overlay the model's low-confidence regions; if they do not coincide with known appearing or disappearing objects, or if discarding them hurts SSIM on static structures, then the confidence map is not measuring temporal discrepancy and the reliability claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that SET does not need a task-specific generative model trained from scratch. The frozen VAE from a natural-image latent diffusion model encodes both SAR and EO inputs into a shared latent space, with reconstruction error low even under heavy speckle noise; the full U-Net is then fine-tuned with the SAR latent as conditioning, and a confidence map output modulates the denoising loss. The resulting model, C-DiffSET, is claimed to achieve the best FID, LPIPS, SSIM, SCC, and PSNR on QXS-SAROPT, SAR2Opt, and SpaceNet6, with the confidence map making outputs structurally reliable while suppressing artifacts and hallucinations in temporally inconsistent regions.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim assumes that the learned confidence map marks on-the-ground temporal differences (objects that actually appear or disappear between passes) rather than simply suppressing any content that is hard to predict.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, SAR-to-EO translation inherits the natural-image priors of a large pretrained diffusion model, so paired-data scarcity is no longer the main bottleneck.
  • SAR inputs can be fed through a natural-image VAE in either single- or full-polarization form, avoiding task-specific encoders.
  • Temporal discrepancies stop corrupting training: the model learns to de-emphasize regions where objects appear or disappear rather than hallucinating them.
  • The same shared latent-space trick should transfer to other remote sensing translations where EO appearance matches natural image statistics.
  • With 50 DDIM inference steps, the framework becomes practical for high-resolution outputs while keeping state-of-the-art metrics.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper's benchmarks, the same recipe of fine-tuning a pretrained text-to-image diffusion model with a pixel-wise confidence branch could be applied to other paired translation tasks with temporal misalignment, such as cloud removal or map-to-aerial update, where the confidence map might serve as an unsupervised change signal.
  • If the VAE alignment observation generalizes, a direct latent-distance measure between SAR and EO distributions before and after fine-tuning would quantify how much of the gain is due to the shared latent space versus the learned mapping; the paper reports reconstruction qualitatively but does not compute such a distance.
  • A testable extension is to evaluate confidence maps against known ground-truth change masks in multi-temporal data; if the maps mark real changes, they could become a practical by-product for change detection.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes C-DiffSET, a SAR-to-EO image translation method built by fine-tuning a pretrained Stable Diffusion v2.1 latent diffusion model. The frozen VAE embeds both SAR and EO images into the same latent space; the SAR latent is concatenated channel-wise with the noisy EO latent and fed to the U-Net, which predicts both the noise and a SoftPlus-transformed pixel-wise confidence map. The training objective is a confidence-weighted diffusion loss inspired by beta-NLL, intended to downweight temporally inconsistent regions such as objects that appear or disappear between acquisitions. The method is evaluated on QXS-SAROPT, SAR2Opt, and SpaceNet6 against GAN-based and LDM-based baselines, with reported improvements in FID, LPIPS, SCC, SSIM, and PSNR, plus ablations for the pretrained initialization, the confidence loss, the text prompt, and the number of inference steps.

Significance. If the central mechanism is validated, the paper would make a useful contribution: it shows that a pretrained LDM can be adapted to SAR-to-EO translation with a relatively simple conditioning scheme, and the claim that the frozen SD VAE embeds SAR and EO in a shared latent space is concrete and testable. The empirical comparison uses external ground-truth metrics and external baselines, and the VAE-reconstruction upper-bound analysis in Tables 4-6 is a good practice. The main weakness is that the paper's signature contribution, confidence-guided reliable object generation, rests almost entirely on a qualitative figure; the same network predicts both the noise and the confidence that weights the noise loss, so the mechanism needs stronger quantitative support before the central claim can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.3, Eq. (3)] The C-Diff loss as displayed is not a well-defined beta-NLL objective and does not reduce to MSE at beta=0. With c_t^beta = 1, the printed expression evaluates to ||(epsilon - epsilon_hat_t) + log(1+tau)||^2 if the log term is inside the norm, or to ||epsilon - epsilon_hat_t||^2 - log(1+tau) if it is outside; neither is the MSE loss used in the ablations. Please restate the loss with explicit norm placement and additive/multiplicative structure, and verify the beta=0 limit. This is required to audit the C-Diff-versus-MSE comparisons in Tables 3 and 8.
  2. [Sec. 3.3 and Sec. 4.4, Fig. 6] The central claim that the confidence map c_t identifies temporal discrepancies is not quantitatively validated. Because the same U-Net predicts both epsilon_hat_t and c_t, the objective in Eq. (3) can be minimized by assigning low confidence to any hard-to-predict region; the log term prevents global collapse but does not anchor low confidence to true appearing/disappearing objects. Figure 6 is qualitative only. Please add a quantitative evaluation linking low-confidence pixels to known temporal changes (for example, ships present in only one acquisition), or a control showing that deweighted regions do not contain legitimate target structure. Without such evidence, the reported improvements of C-Diff over MSE in Tables 3 and 8 are equally consistent with the model learning to avoid committing in difficult regions.
  3. [Sec. 4.3, Tables 1-2] The comparison with ControlNet and Uni-ControlNet is not controlled for parameter updates. C-DiffSET fine-tunes the pretrained U-Net, while the ControlNet methods are designed to keep it frozen; initializing all methods from the same SD v2.1 weights does not remove this confound. A ControlNet-style variant of C-DiffSET, or a frozen-U-Net version of the proposed conditioning scheme, would clarify whether the large reported margins come from the confidence-guided loss and latent concatenation or simply from full fine-tuning of the pretrained U-Net.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 9] The ablation table labeled "SpaceNet6 Dataset" reports exactly the SAR2Opt numbers from Table 1 (FID 77.81, LPIPS 0.346, SCC 0.0035, SSIM 0.286, PSNR 16.613); also, the prompt string is misspelled as "Eletro-Optical Image" instead of "Electro-Optical Image".
  2. [Sec. 3.4, Eq. (4)] The inference equation uses "Dummy" confidence values, but the paper never defines what Dummy is; if the confidence head is not used at inference, this should be stated explicitly.
  3. [Fig. 4 and Sec. 4.2] The speckle-noise levels sigma_x = 0.1 and 1.0 in Fig. 4 are not defined; please specify the noise model and how these values were applied to the SAR images.
  4. [Sec. 4.3] The paper says official implementations were used for general methods, but SET-specific methods marked with a dagger were re-implemented from technical descriptions; providing code or detailed reimplementation settings would improve reproducibility and confidence in the comparison.
  5. [Sec. 1, contributions] There is a typo in the contributions list: "mistigate" should be "mitigate".

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: benchmarked results are external, and the confidence mechanism is an unvalidated interpretation rather than a definitional reduction.

full rationale

C-DiffSET's headline claims are measured against external ground-truth EO images and external baselines, and the load-bearing ingredients (Stable Diffusion v2.1, the frozen VAE, the β-NLL formulation of Seitzer et al., and all three datasets) are external and independently established. The 'same latent space' claim is an empirical observation supported by VAE reconstruction experiments (Figs. 4 and 7), not a definitional equivalence: no equation defines SAR-EO alignment in terms of the translation output. The C-Diff loss is a proposed training objective, and the confidence map is a learned auxiliary output; the assertion that it reflects temporal discrepancies is a semantic interpretation offered in Sec. 3.3 and illustrated only qualitatively in Fig. 6. This is an unvalidated mechanism, not a circular reduction, because no equation defines temporal discrepancy in terms of ĉ_t, and the quantitative metrics are evaluated on held-out data against external references. The authors' self-citations [31, 32, 73] appear only as baselines or related work and do not carry the central argument. Two non-circular concerns remain: the printed Eq. (3) does not literally reduce to a standard MSE loss at β=0 when τ = log 2π, and the confidence map's temporal-discrepancy semantics lack quantitative validation against known discrepancies; both are correctness/auditability issues rather than evidence of circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on pretrained components (Stable Diffusion v2.1 VAE and U-Net, CLIP text encoder) whose suitability for SAR and EO data is assumed from reconstruction visualizations rather than quantitative latent-space alignment; on DDPM and DDIM mathematics treated as standard; and on a small set of hand-chosen constants (beta=1, tau=log 2*pi, prompt, 50 inference steps). No invented physical entities are introduced; the confidence map is a per-pixel network output, not a new dynamical entity.

free parameters (4)
  • beta (confidence exponent in LC-Diff) = 1
    Set to 1 because the authors report it 'empirically... yields the best performance'; beta=0 collapses the loss toward MSE. Chosen during development, not derived.
  • Fixed text prompt = "electro-optical image"
    Hand-picked conditioning text; the ablation in Table 9 shows it beats the null prompt on the SpaceNet6 test set. A free design choice affecting results.
  • Total DDIM inference steps (Ttest) = 50
    Selected via a test-set ablation on the first 50 SpaceNet6 samples (Fig. 9, Fig. 10), trading quality for runtime; all reported headline numbers use this value.
  • Tau (margin term in LC-Diff) = log 2*pi (from Seitzer et al. [53])
    Adopted as a fixed constant from the beta-NLL paper rather than derived here; it enters the loss definition and is not tuned in the paper.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Stable Diffusion v2.1's VAE embeds both SAR and EO images into a shared latent space where the diffusion U-Net can condition SAR latents onto EO denoising.
    Sec. 3.2, Fig. 4. Supported only by reconstruction visualizations and low reconstruction error; no quantitative alignment or correspondence metric between z_x and z_y is given, yet the whole framework assumes conditioning works.
  • domain assumption The frozen VAE's reconstruction D_vae(E_vae(Y)) is an upper bound on achievable translation quality.
    App. A.2, Tables 4-6. Used to contextualize results; assumes VAE reconstruction error is the only irreducible ceiling and that diffusion errors do not compound.
  • standard math DDPM forward process with T=1,000 training steps and DDIM with 50 steps defines the noise schedule and reverse SDE.
    Sec. 3.3 and Sec. 4.2, standard diffusion formulation from [18] and [58].
  • standard math The log term in LC-Diff prevents the confidence map from collapsing to zero, and SoftPlus keeps c_t non-negative.
    Sec. 3.3. Standard regularizer argument, but Eq. (3) as printed puts the log term inside the squared norm, so the stated collapse-prevention and beta=0-to-MSE claims are not consistent with the printed equation.
  • domain assumption Text conditioning through the frozen CLIP text encoder with a fixed prompt steers EO-like appearance.
    Sec. 3.3 and Table 9. Prompt choice affects metrics by one to two points on some metrics; the mechanism is assumed, not analyzed.
  • domain assumption Spatial downsampling by 8x in the VAE inherently alleviates local spatial misalignments.
    Sec. 1, contribution (ii). Plausible but untested; no controlled experiment varies misalignment magnitude to verify the claim.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of C-DiffSET: Leveraging Latent Diffusion for SAR-to-EO Image Translation with Confidence-Guided Reliable Object Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FJHPGGPB

@misc{pith2026241110788,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: C-DiffSET: Leveraging Latent Diffusion for SAR-to-EO Image Translation with Confidence-Guided Reliable Object Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FJHPGGPB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.10788}
}
read the original abstract

Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery provides robust environmental and temporal coverage (e.g., during clouds, seasons, day-night cycles), yet its noise and unique structural patterns pose interpretation challenges, especially for non-experts. SAR-to-EO (Electro-Optical) image translation (SET) has emerged to make SAR images more perceptually interpretable. However, traditional approaches trained from scratch on limited SAR-EO datasets are prone to overfitting. To address these challenges, we introduce Confidence Diffusion for SAR-to-EO Translation, called C-DiffSET, a framework leveraging pretrained Latent Diffusion Model (LDM) extensively trained on natural images, thus enabling effective adaptation to the EO domain. Remarkably, we find that the pretrained VAE encoder aligns SAR and EO images in the same latent space, even with varying noise levels in SAR inputs. To further improve pixel-wise fidelity for SET, we propose a confidence-guided diffusion (C-Diff) loss that mitigates artifacts from temporal discrepancies, such as appearing or disappearing objects, thereby enhancing structural accuracy. C-DiffSET achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) results on multiple datasets, significantly outperforming the very recent image-to-image translation methods and SET methods with large margins.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.10788 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Qualitative comparison of SAR-to-EO image translation (SET) results for very recent methods and our proposed C-DiffSET. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Examples of misalignments and discrepancies in paired [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overall framework of our Confidence Diffusion for SAR-to-EO Translation (C-DiffSET). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (17 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Results of applying the VAE encoder and decoder from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visual comparison of SET results on the SpaceNet6 and SAR2Opt datasets. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Confidence maps generated by C-DiffSET at timestep [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Results of applying the VAE encoder and decoder from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Visual comparison of SET results with and without C [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Impact of total inference steps on performance metrics (FID, LPIPS, SCC, SSIM, and PSNR) and inference time. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Visualization of C-DiffSET results across varying numbers of total inference steps. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Visualization of C-DiffSET results across inference timesteps on the SpaceNet6 dataset with a total of 50 inference steps. Each [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Visual comparison of SET results on the QXS-SAROPT dataset. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA-SET, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Visual comparison of SET results on the QXS-SAROPT dataset. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA-SET, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Visual comparison of SET results on the QXS-SAROPT dataset. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA-SET, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Visual comparison of SET results on the QXS-SAROPT dataset. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA-SET, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Visual comparison of SET results on the QXS-SAROPT dataset. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA-SET, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Visual comparison of SET results on the SAR2Opt dataset. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA-SET, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Visual comparison of SET results on the SAR2Opt dataset. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA-SET, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Visual comparison of SET results on the SpaceNet6 dataset. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA-SET, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Visual comparison of SET results on the SpaceNet6 dataset. 1st rows: GAN-based (Pix2pix, CycleGAN, CFCA-SET, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_20.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. PAN-Crafter: Learning Modality-Consistent Alignment for PAN-Sharpening

    cs.CV 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new pansharpening architecture with joint PAN/MS reconstruction and local cross-modality attention reports the best published scores on WorldView-3, QuickBird, GaoFen-2, and zero-shot WorldView-2 benchmarks.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Rethinking the truly unsupervised image-to-image translation

    Kyungjune Baek, Yunjey Choi, Youngjung Uh, Jaejun Yoo, and Hyunjung Shim. Rethinking the truly unsupervised image-to-image translation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision , pages 14154– 14163, 2021. 3

    2021

  2. [2]

    Sar to optical image translation with color supervised diffusion model

    Xinyu Bai and Feng Xu. Sar to optical image translation with color supervised diffusion model. In IGARSS 2024- 2024 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, pages 963–966. IEEE, 2024. 3

    2024

  3. [3]

    Conditional diffusion for sar to optical image translation

    Xinyu Bai, Xinyang Pu, and Feng Xu. Conditional diffusion for sar to optical image translation. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 2023. 3

    2023

  4. [4]

    Hybrid compact polarimetric sar for environ- mental monitoring with the radarsat constellation mission

    Brian Brisco, Masoud Mahdianpari, and Fariba Moham- madimanesh. Hybrid compact polarimetric sar for environ- mental monitoring with the radarsat constellation mission. Remote Sensing, 12(20):3283, 2020. 2

    2020

  5. [5]

    Sar-to-eo image translation with multi- conditional adversarial networks

    Armando Cabrera, Miriam Cha, Prafull Sharma, and Michael Newey. Sar-to-eo image translation with multi- conditional adversarial networks. In 2021 55th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers , pages 1710–1714. IEEE, 2021. 3

    2021

  6. [6]

    Reusing discriminators for encoding: Towards unsupervised image-to-image translation

    Runfa Chen, Wenbing Huang, Binghui Huang, Fuchun Sun, and Bin Fang. Reusing discriminators for encoding: Towards unsupervised image-to-image translation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 8168–8177, 2020. 3

    2020

  7. [7]

    Stargan: Unified genera- tive adversarial networks for multi-domain image-to-image translation

    Yunjey Choi, Minje Choi, Munyoung Kim, Jung-Woo Ha, Sunghun Kim, and Jaegul Choo. Stargan: Unified genera- tive adversarial networks for multi-domain image-to-image translation. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 8789–8797,

  8. [8]

    Explainable, physics-aware, trustworthy artificial intelligence: A paradigm shift for syn- thetic aperture radar

    Mihai Datcu, Zhongling Huang, Andrei Anghel, Juanping Zhao, and Remus Cacoveanu. Explainable, physics-aware, trustworthy artificial intelligence: A paradigm shift for syn- thetic aperture radar. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine, 11(1):8–25, 2023. 2, 3

    work page 2023

Show all 87 references
  1. [9]

    Gan-based sar-to-optical image translation with re- gion information

    Kento Doi, Ken Sakurada, Masaki Onishi, and Akira Iwasaki. Gan-based sar-to-optical image translation with re- gion information. In IGARSS 2020-2020 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium , pages 2069–

    2020

  2. [10]

    Incorporating second-order func- tional knowledge for better option pricing

    Charles Dugas, Yoshua Bengio, Franc ¸ois B ´elisle, Claude Nadeau, and Ren´e Garcia. Incorporating second-order func- tional knowledge for better option pricing. Advances in neu- ral information processing systems, 13, 2000. 5

    2000

  3. [11]

    Scaling recti- fied flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis

    Patrick Esser, Sumith Kulal, Andreas Blattmann, Rahim Entezari, Jonas M ¨uller, Harry Saini, Yam Levi, Dominik Lorenz, Axel Sauer, Frederic Boesel, et al. Scaling recti- fied flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis. In Forty-first International Conference on Mach...

    2024

  4. [12]

    Cloud removal with fusion of high resolution optical and sar images using generative adversarial networks

    Jianhao Gao, Qiangqiang Yuan, Jie Li, Hai Zhang, and Xin Su. Cloud removal with fusion of high resolution optical and sar images using generative adversarial networks. Remote Sensing, 12(1):191, 2020. 2

    2020

  5. [13]

    Some fundamental properties of speckle

    Joseph W Goodman. Some fundamental properties of speckle. JOSA, 66(11):1145–1150, 1976. 2, 3

    1976

  6. [14]

    A compar- ison of deep learning object detection models for satellite imagery

    Austen Groener, Gary Chern, and Mark Pritt. A compar- ison of deep learning object detection models for satellite imagery. In 2019 IEEE applied imagery pattern recognition workshop (AIPR), pages 1–10. IEEE, 2019. 2

    2019

  7. [15]

    Learning sar-to-optical image translation via diffusion models with color memory

    Zhe Guo, Jiayi Liu, Qinglin Cai, Zhibo Zhang, and Shaohui Mei. Learning sar-to-optical image translation via diffusion models with color memory. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 2024. 2, 3

    2024

  8. [16]

    Lotus: Diffusion-based visual foundation model for high-quality dense prediction

    Jing He, Haodong Li, Wei Yin, Yixun Liang, Leheng Li, Kaiqiang Zhou, Hongbo Liu, Bingbing Liu, and Ying- Cong Chen. Lotus: Diffusion-based visual foundation model for high-quality dense prediction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.18124, 2024. 4

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilib- rium

    Martin Heusel, Hubert Ramsauer, Thomas Unterthiner, Bernhard Nessler, and Sepp Hochreiter. Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilib- rium. Advances in neural information processing systems , 30, 2017. 6

    2017

  10. [18]

    Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020. 3, 5, 6

    2020

  11. [19]

    The qxs-saropt dataset for deep learning in sar-optical data fusion

    Meiyu Huang, Yao Xu, Lixin Qian, Weili Shi, Yaqin Zhang, Wei Bao, Nan Wang, Xuejiao Liu, and Xueshuang Xiang. The qxs-saropt dataset for deep learning in sar-optical data fusion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.08259, 2021. 3, 6

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Multimodal unsupervised image-to-image translation

    Xun Huang, Ming-Yu Liu, Serge Belongie, and Jan Kautz. Multimodal unsupervised image-to-image translation. In Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), pages 172–189, 2018. 3

    2018

  13. [21]

    A hybrid and explainable deep learning framework for sar im- ages

    Zhongling Huang, Mihai Datcu, Zongxu Pan, and Bin Lei. A hybrid and explainable deep learning framework for sar im- ages. In IGARSS 2020-2020 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium , pages 1727–1730. IEEE,

    2020

  14. [22]

    Globally and locally consistent image completion

    Satoshi Iizuka, Edgar Simo-Serra, and Hiroshi Ishikawa. Globally and locally consistent image completion. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG), 36(4):1–14, 2017. 3

    2017

  15. [23]

    Open clip, 2021

    Gabriel Ilharco, Mitchell Wortsman, Nicholas Carlini, Rohan Taori, Achal Dave, Vaishaal Shankar, Hongseok Namkoong, John Miller, Hannaneh Hajishirzi, Ali Farhadi, and Ludwig Schmidt. Open clip, 2021. 6

    2021

  16. [24]

    Image-to-image translation with conditional adver- sarial networks

    Phillip Isola, Jun-Yan Zhu, Tinghui Zhou, and Alexei A Efros. Image-to-image translation with conditional adver- sarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 1125–1134,

  17. [25]

    Sar image colorization using mul- tidomain cycle-consistency generative adversarial network

    Guang Ji, Zhaohui Wang, Lifan Zhou, Yu Xia, Shan Zhong, and Shengrong Gong. Sar image colorization using mul- tidomain cycle-consistency generative adversarial network. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters , 18(2):296– 300, 2020. 2, 3

    2020

  18. [26]

    Repurpos- ing diffusion-based image generators for monocular depth 17 estimation

    Bingxin Ke, Anton Obukhov, Shengyu Huang, Nando Met- zger, Rodrigo Caye Daudt, and Konrad Schindler. Repurpos- ing diffusion-based image generators for monocular depth 17 estimation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 9...

    2024

  19. [27]

    Instaformer: Instance-aware image-to-image translation with transformer

    Soohyun Kim, Jongbeom Baek, Jihye Park, Gyeongnyeon Kim, and Seungryong Kim. Instaformer: Instance-aware image-to-image translation with transformer. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition, pages 18321–18331, 2022. 3

    2022

  20. [28]

    Conditional brownian bridge diffusion model for vhr sar to optical image transla- tion

    Seon-Hoon Kim and Dae-won Chung. Conditional brownian bridge diffusion model for vhr sar to optical image transla- tion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.07947, 2024. 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Auto-encoding variational bayes

    Diederik P Kingma. Auto-encoding variational bayes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114, 2013. 2

    2013 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Multi- scale translation method from sar to optical remote sensing images based on conditional generative adversarial network

    Yingying Kong, Siyuan Liu, and Xiangyang Peng. Multi- scale translation method from sar to optical remote sensing images based on conditional generative adversarial network. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 43(8):2837–2860,

  23. [31]

    Cfca-set: Coarse-to-fine context-aware sar-to-eo translation with auxiliary learning of sar-to-nir translation

    Jaehyup Lee, Hyebin Cho, Doochun Seo, Hyun-Ho Kim, Jaeheon Jeong, and Munchurl Kim. Cfca-set: Coarse-to-fine context-aware sar-to-eo translation with auxiliary learning of sar-to-nir translation. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2023. 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10

    2023

  24. [32]

    Segmentation-guided context learning using eo object labels for stable sar-to-eo translation

    Jaehyup Lee, Hyun-Ho Kim, Doochun Seo, and Munchurl Kim. Segmentation-guided context learning using eo object labels for stable sar-to-eo translation. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 2023. 2, 3

    2023

  25. [33]

    Bbdm: Image- to-image translation with brownian bridge diffusion models

    Bo Li, Kaitao Xue, Bin Liu, and Yu-Kun Lai. Bbdm: Image- to-image translation with brownian bridge diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern Recognition, pages 1952–1961, 2023. 3, 6, 8, 9, 10

    1952

  26. [34]

    A deep translation (gan) based change detection net- work for optical and sar remote sensing images

    Xinghua Li, Zhengshun Du, Yanyuan Huang, and Zhenyu Tan. A deep translation (gan) based change detection net- work for optical and sar remote sensing images. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing , 179:14– 34, 2021. 3

    2021

  27. [35]

    Smoothing the disentangled latent style space for unsupervised image-to-image translation

    Yahui Liu, Enver Sangineto, Yajing Chen, Linchao Bao, Haoxian Zhang, Nicu Sebe, Bruno Lepri, Wei Wang, and Marco De Nadai. Smoothing the disentangled latent style space for unsupervised image-to-image translation. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision ...

    2021

  28. [36]

    Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows

    Ze Liu, Yutong Lin, Yue Cao, Han Hu, Yixuan Wei, Zheng Zhang, Stephen Lin, and Baining Guo. Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 10012–10022, 2021. 3

    2021

  29. [37]

    Decoupled weight decay regularization

    I Loshchilov. Decoupled weight decay regularization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017. 6

    2017 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Sgdr: Stochas- tic gradient descent with warm restarts

    Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. Sgdr: Stochas- tic gradient descent with warm restarts. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.03983, 2016. 6

    2016 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Land cover change detection with heterogeneous remote sensing images: Review, progress, and perspective

    ZhiYong Lv, HaiTao Huang, Xinghua Li, MingHua Zhao, J´on Atli Benediktsson, WeiWei Sun, and Nicola Falco. Land cover change detection with heterogeneous remote sensing images: Review, progress, and perspective. Proceedings of the IEEE, 110(12):1976–1991, 2022. 2

    1976

  32. [40]

    Iterative training sample augmentation for enhancing land cover change detection per- formance with deep learning neural network

    Zhiyong Lv, Haitao Huang, Weiwei Sun, Meng Jia, J ´on Atli Benediktsson, and Fengrui Chen. Iterative training sample augmentation for enhancing land cover change detection per- formance with deep learning neural network. IEEE Transac- tions on Neural Networks and Learning Syst...

    2023

  33. [41]

    Novel piecewise dis- tance based on adaptive region key-points extraction for lccd with vhr remote-sensing images

    Zhiyong Lv, Pingdong Zhong, Wei Wang, Zhenzhen You, J´on Atli Benediktsson, and Cheng Shi. Novel piecewise dis- tance based on adaptive region key-points extraction for lccd with vhr remote-sensing images. IEEE Transactions on Geo- science and Remote Sensing, 61:1–9, 2023. 2

    2023

  34. [42]

    Cloud removal in sentinel-2 imagery using a deep residual neural network and sar-optical data fusion

    Andrea Meraner, Patrick Ebel, Xiao Xiang Zhu, and Michael Schmitt. Cloud removal in sentinel-2 imagery using a deep residual neural network and sar-optical data fusion. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing , 166:333– 346, 2020. 2

    2020

  35. [43]

    Automatic differentiation in pytorch

    Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Soumith Chintala, Gregory Chanan, Edward Yang, Zachary DeVito, Zeming Lin, Al- ban Desmaison, Luca Antiga, and Adam Lerer. Automatic differentiation in pytorch. 2017. 6

    2017

  36. [44]

    Context encoders: Feature learning by inpainting

    Deepak Pathak, Philipp Krahenbuhl, Jeff Donahue, Trevor Darrell, and Alexei A Efros. Context encoders: Feature learning by inpainting. In Proceedings of the IEEE con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 2536–2544, 2016. 3

    2016

  37. [45]

    Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion mod- els for high-resolution image synthesis

    Dustin Podell, Zion English, Kyle Lacey, Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Jonas M ¨uller, Joe Penna, and Robin Rombach. Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion mod- els for high-resolution image synthesis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.01952, 2023. 4

    2023 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion. In International conference on machine learning, ...

    2021

  39. [47]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Bj ¨orn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10684–10695, 2022. 2, 3, 4, 6

    2022

  40. [48]

    U- net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmen- tation

    Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U- net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmen- tation. In Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention–MICCAI 2015: 18th international conference, Munich, Germany, October 5-9, 2015, proceedings, pa...

    2015

  41. [49]

    Palette: Image-to-image diffusion models

    Chitwan Saharia, William Chan, Huiwen Chang, Chris Lee, Jonathan Ho, Tim Salimans, David Fleet, and Mohammad Norouzi. Palette: Image-to-image diffusion models. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2022 conference proceedings, pages 1–10,

    2022

  42. [50]

    The sen1-2 dataset for deep learning in sar-optical data fusion

    Michael Schmitt, Lloyd Haydn Hughes, and Xiao Xiang Zhu. The sen1-2 dataset for deep learning in sar-optical data fusion. arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.01569, 2018. 2, 9

    2018 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Laion-5b: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models

    Christoph Schuhmann, Romain Beaumont, Richard Vencu, Cade Gordon, Ross Wightman, Mehdi Cherti, Theo 18 Coombes, Aarush Katta, Clayton Mullis, Mitchell Worts- man, et al. Laion-5b: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models. Advances in Neural In...

    2022

  44. [52]

    Plfm: Pixel-level merging of intermediate feature maps by disentangling and fusing spatial and temporal data for cloud removal

    Alessandro Sebastianelli, Erika Puglisi, Maria Pia Del Rosso, Jamila Mifdal, Artur Nowakowski, Pierre Philippe Mathieu, Fiora Pirri, and Silvia Liber- ata Ullo. Plfm: Pixel-level merging of intermediate feature maps by disentangling and fusing spatial and temporal data for clo...

    2022

  45. [53]

    On the pitfalls of heteroscedastic uncertainty estimation with probabilistic neural networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.09168, 2022

    Maximilian Seitzer, Arash Tavakoli, Dimitrije Antic, and Georg Martius. On the pitfalls of heteroscedastic uncertainty estimation with probabilistic neural networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.09168, 2022. 5, 11

    2022 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Improved flood insights: Diffusion-based sar to eo image translation

    Minseok Seo, Youngtack Oh, Doyi Kim, Dongmin Kang, and Yeji Choi. Improved flood insights: Diffusion-based sar to eo image translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.07123 ,

    arXiv

  47. [55]

    Spatially-adaptive pixel- wise networks for fast image translation

    Tamar Rott Shaham, Micha ¨el Gharbi, Richard Zhang, Eli Shechtman, and Tomer Michaeli. Spatially-adaptive pixel- wise networks for fast image translation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 14882–14891, 2021. 3

    2021

  48. [56]

    Spacenet 6: Multi-sensor all weather mapping dataset

    Jacob Shermeyer, Daniel Hogan, Jason Brown, Adam Van Etten, Nicholas Weir, Fabio Pacifici, Ronny Han- sch, Alexei Bastidas, Scott Soenen, Todd Bacastow, et al. Spacenet 6: Multi-sensor all weather mapping dataset. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion ...

  49. [57]

    Extraction of bridge features from high- resolution insar data and optical images

    Uwe Soergel, Antje Thiele, Hermann Gross, and Ulrich Thoennessen. Extraction of bridge features from high- resolution insar data and optical images. In 2007 Urban Re- mote Sensing Joint Event, pages 1–6. IEEE, 2007. 2, 3

    2007

  50. [58]

    Denoising diffusion implicit models

    Jiaming Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Denoising diffusion implicit models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02502, 2020. 6, 10

    2010 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Time- frequency analysis in high-resolution sar imagery

    Marc Spigai, C ´eline Tison, and Jean-Claude Souyris. Time- frequency analysis in high-resolution sar imagery. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing , 49(7): 2699–2711, 2011. 3

    2011

  52. [60]

    Transport infrastructure monitoring by data fusion of gpr and sar imagery information

    Fabio Tosti, Valerio Gagliardi, Fabrizio D’Amico, and Amir M Alani. Transport infrastructure monitoring by data fusion of gpr and sar imagery information. Transportation Research Procedia, 45:771–778, 2020. 2

    2020

  53. [61]

    Three-dimensional topographic mapping with aster stereo data in rugged topography

    Thierry Toutin. Three-dimensional topographic mapping with aster stereo data in rugged topography. IEEE Transac- tions on geoscience and remote sensing, 40(10):2241–2247,

  54. [62]

    You only look twice: Rapid multi- scale object detection in satellite imagery

    Adam Van Etten. You only look twice: Rapid multi- scale object detection in satellite imagery. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.09512, 2018. 2

    2018 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Diffusers: State-of-the-art diffu- sion models

    Patrick von Platen, Suraj Patil, Anton Lozhkov, Pedro Cuenca, Nathan Lambert, Kashif Rasul, Mishig Davaadorj, Dhruv Nair, Sayak Paul, William Berman, Yiyi Xu, Steven Liu, and Thomas Wolf. Diffusers: State-of-the-art diffu- sion models. https://github.com/huggingface/ diffusers...

    2022

  56. [64]

    Generating high quality visible images from sar images using cnns

    Puyang Wang and Vishal M Patel. Generating high quality visible images from sar images using cnns. In 2018 IEEE Radar Conference (RadarConf18), pages 0570–0575. IEEE,

    2018

  57. [65]

    Sea-raft: Simple, efficient, accurate raft for optical flow

    Yihan Wang, Lahav Lipson, and Jia Deng. Sea-raft: Simple, efficient, accurate raft for optical flow. In European Confer- ence on Computer Vision, pages 36–54. Springer, 2025. 5

    2025

  58. [66]

    Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity

    Zhou Wang, Alan C Bovik, Hamid R Sheikh, and Eero P Si- moncelli. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE transactions on image processing, 13(4):600–612, 2004. 6

    2004

  59. [67]

    Cfrwd-gan for sar-to-optical image translation

    Juan Wei, Huanxin Zou, Li Sun, Xu Cao, Shitian He, Shuo Liu, and Yuqing Zhang. Cfrwd-gan for sar-to-optical image translation. Remote Sensing, 15(10):2547, 2023. 3

    2023

  60. [68]

    A collection of sar methodolo- gies for monitoring wetlands

    Lori White, Brian Brisco, Mohammed Dabboor, Andreas Schmitt, and Andrew Pratt. A collection of sar methodolo- gies for monitoring wetlands. Remote sensing, 7(6):7615– 7645, 2015. 2

    2015

  61. [69]

    Seesr: Towards semantics- aware real-world image super-resolution

    Rongyuan Wu, Tao Yang, Lingchen Sun, Zhengqiang Zhang, Shuai Li, and Lei Zhang. Seesr: Towards semantics- aware real-world image super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 25456–25467, 2024. 4

    2024

  62. [70]

    Stegogan: Leveraging steganography for non-bijective image-to-image translation

    Sidi Wu, Yizi Chen, Samuel Mermet, Lorenz Hurni, Konrad Schindler, Nicolas Gonthier, and Loic Landrieu. Stegogan: Leveraging steganography for non-bijective image-to-image translation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages...

    2024

  63. [71]

    Disaster monitoring by fully polarimet- ric sar data acquired with alos-palsar

    Yoshio Yamaguchi. Disaster monitoring by fully polarimet- ric sar data acquired with alos-palsar. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100(10):2851–2860, 2012. 2

    2012

  64. [72]

    Deterministic guidance diffusion model for probabilistic weather forecasting

    Donggeun Yoon, Minseok Seo, Doyi Kim, Yeji Choi, and Donghyeon Cho. Deterministic guidance diffusion model for probabilistic weather forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.02819, 2023. 3, 6, 8, 9, 10

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Transformer-based synthetic-to-measured sar image translation via learning of representational features

    Geunhyuk Youk and Munchurl Kim. Transformer-based synthetic-to-measured sar image translation via learning of representational features. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61:1–18, 2023. 3, 6, 8, 10

    2023

  66. [74]

    Diffusing colors: Image colorization with text guided diffusion

    Nir Zabari, Aharon Azulay, Alexey Gorkor, Tavi Halperin, and Ohad Fried. Diffusing colors: Image colorization with text guided diffusion. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2023 Conference Papers, pages 1–11, 2023. 4

    2023

  67. [75]

    Fec: A feature fusion framework for sar target recognition based on electromagnetic scattering features and deep cnn features

    Jinsong Zhang, Mengdao Xing, and Yiyuan Xie. Fec: A feature fusion framework for sar target recognition based on electromagnetic scattering features and deep cnn features. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing , 59 (3):2174–2187, 2020. 3

    2020

  68. [76]

    Feature- guided sar-to-optical image translation

    Jiexin Zhang, Jianjiang Zhou, and Xiwen Lu. Feature- guided sar-to-optical image translation. Ieee Access , 8: 70925–70937, 2020. 2, 3

    2020

  69. [77]

    Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models

    Lvmin Zhang, Anyi Rao, and Maneesh Agrawala. Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 3836–3847, 2023. 3, 6, 8, 9, 10 19

    2023

  70. [78]

    Colorful image colorization

    Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, and Alexei A Efros. Colorful image colorization. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2016: 14th European Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Octo- ber 11-14, 2016, Proceedings, Part III 14 , pages 649–666. Springer, 2016. 3

    2016

  71. [79]

    Real-time user-guided image colorization with learned deep priors

    Richard Zhang, Jun-Yan Zhu, Phillip Isola, Xinyang Geng, Angela S Lin, Tianhe Yu, and Alexei A Efros. Real-time user-guided image colorization with learned deep priors. arXiv preprint arXiv:1705.02999, 2017. 3

    2017 arXiv

  72. [80]

    The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric

    Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, Alexei A Efros, Eli Shecht- man, and Oliver Wang. The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recogni- tion, pages 586–595, 2018. 6

    2018

  73. [81]

    The characteristics of the multipath scattering and the ap- plication for geometry extraction in high-resolution sar im- ages

    Yueting Zhang, Chibiao Ding, Xiaolan Qiu, and Fangfang Li. The characteristics of the multipath scattering and the ap- plication for geometry extraction in high-resolution sar im- ages. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sens- ing, 53(8):4687–4699, 2015. 2, 3

    2015

  74. [82]

    Uni-controlnet: All-in-one control to text-to-image diffusion models

    Shihao Zhao, Dongdong Chen, Yen-Chun Chen, Jianmin Bao, Shaozhe Hao, Lu Yuan, and Kwan-Yee K Wong. Uni-controlnet: All-in-one control to text-to-image diffusion models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 36:11127–11150, 2023. 3, 6, 8, 9, 10

    2023

  75. [83]

    A comparative analysis of gan-based methods for sar- to-optical image translation

    Yitao Zhao, Turgay Celik, Nanqing Liu, and Heng-Chao Li. A comparative analysis of gan-based methods for sar- to-optical image translation. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 19:1–5, 2022. 3, 6, 9

    2022

  76. [84]

    Ship surveillance by integration of space-borne sar and ais–review of current research

    Zhi Zhao, Kefeng Ji, Xiangwei Xing, Huanxin Zou, and Shilin Zhou. Ship surveillance by integration of space-borne sar and ais–review of current research. The Journal of Navi- gation, 67(1):177–189, 2014. 2

    2014

  77. [85]

    The spatially-correlative loss for various image translation tasks

    Chuanxia Zheng, Tat-Jen Cham, and Jianfei Cai. The spatially-correlative loss for various image translation tasks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, pages 16407–16417, 2021. 3

    2021

  78. [86]

    A wavelet transform method to merge landsat tm and spot panchromatic data

    Jie Zhou, Daniel L Civco, and John A Silander. A wavelet transform method to merge landsat tm and spot panchromatic data. International journal of remote sensing , 19(4):743– 757, 1998. 6

    1998

  79. [87]

    Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle- consistent adversarial networks

    Jun-Yan Zhu, Taesung Park, Phillip Isola, and Alexei A Efros. Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle- consistent adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision , pages 2223– 2232, 2017. 3, 6, 8, 9, 10 20

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.