Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 103 references

AffectSRNet : Facial Emotion-Aware Super-Resolution Network

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper introduces AffectSRNet, a face super-resolution network that uses graph embeddings of facial landmarks to upscale low-resolution faces while preserving the intensity and fidelity of their expressions, and claims it outperforms…

desk verdict Sensible architecture, but the emotion-preservation claim rests on an unvalidated metric and a training-loss contradiction that undermines the main result. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.09932 v1 pith:NBQWXNRS submitted 2025-02-14 cs.CV

Syed Sameen Ahmad Rizvi , Soham Kumar , Aryan Seth , Pratik Narang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords facesuper-resolutionfacialexpressionrecognitionemotionpreservationgraphconvolutionalnetworkmultimodalfusionconsistencymetriclow-resolutionfaceslandmarkpriors
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

The paper tries to establish that a face super-resolution network can restore high-resolution facial detail from low-resolution input without washing out the emotion on the face. It argues that facial landmark geometry, encoded as graph embeddings and fused into a standard super-resolution backbone, is the right prior for keeping expressions intact. To back this up, it introduces a new Emotion Consistency Metric that compares the confidence distributions of a pretrained expression classifier on original and super-resolved faces. The authors report that AffectSRNet beats six existing super-resolution methods on this metric on CelebA, FFHQ, and Helen, while staying comparable on PSNR, SSIM, and LPIPS.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is a graph-embedding pathway: 478 facial landmarks extracted by Mediapipe are connected by hand-defined edges linking eyes, lips, and cheeks, passed through stacked Graph Convolutional Network layers, and fused into the RRDB super-resolution backbone at three points via Multimodal Split Attention Fusion (MSAF) blocks. The other load-bearing piece is the Emotion Consistency Metric (ECM), defined as ECM = 0.5*LH + log(Lconf), where LH is the histogram loss between class-confidence histograms of original and super-resolved images and Lconf is the mean absolute difference in predictive logit entropy; this metric is meant to quantify how much emotional content survives upscaling.

What would settle it

Train or fine-tune AffectSRNet with the histogram-loss term Lhist removed (set k2=0 in Eq. (2)) and compare ECM against the published numbers; if the emotion-fidelity gain largely disappears, the reported advantage comes from optimizing the metric rather than from the landmark-graph architecture. Alternatively, replace DDAMFN++ with a different, independently trained FER model or with human emotion ratings and check whether AffectSRNet still ranks first on the resulting ECM.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that expression-preserving super-resolution can be achieved by injecting facial-landmark graph embeddings into an RRDB-based super-resolution network through a multimodal split-attention fusion block. The key result is that this architecture lowers the Emotion Consistency Metric on all three benchmark datasets at both 4x and 8x upscaling compared with SRCNN, EDSR, FSRNet, DIC, and SPARNet, with no consistent loss in standard image-quality metrics. The paper further claims that the new ECM, computed as a log-weighted sum of histogram loss and average predictive-entropy difference from the DDAMFN++ classifier, is a useful tool for evaluating emotion preservation in super-resolved faces.

Load-bearing premise

The entire claim rests on the assumption that the Emotion Consistency Metric, which depends on the confidence outputs of one pretrained expression classifier (DDAMFN++), genuinely tracks whether a human would still read the same emotion in the super-resolved face.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If AffectSRNet's emotion-fidelity gain holds, low-resolution surveillance footage could be upscaled before expression analysis without sacrificing FER accuracy.
  • The extensible loss function could be fine-tuned into existing face super-resolution networks, giving them an emotion-preserving mode.
  • The Emotion Consistency Metric gives future work a quantitative target for emotion-aware super-resolution, beyond PSNR and SSIM.
  • At 8x upscaling, where generic methods blur away expression cues, the graph-embedding prior is claimed to keep fine mouth and eye structure intact.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct check the authors do not report: whether ECM improvements translate to higher downstream facial-expression recognition accuracy on an independent benchmark, or only to closer agreement with DDAMFN++.
  • The paper says emotion-consistency losses are used only as metrics, yet Eq. (2) explicitly includes Lhist in the training objective; if the histogram loss was active during training, the reported ECM wins could reflect metric overfitting rather than genuine expression preservation.
  • The same graph-embedding prior could plausibly be adapted to preserve other facial attributes such as age, gaze, or identity during super-resolution, extending the core idea beyond emotion.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes AffectSRNet, an emotion-aware face super-resolution network that augments an ESRGAN-style RRDB backbone with Mediapipe 3D facial landmarks processed by a GCN and fused through multimodal split-attention fusion blocks. The authors introduce an Emotion Consistency Metric (ECM) based on histogram differences and mean entropy differences of DDAMFN++ confidence scores between original and super-resolved test images, and report PSNR/SSIM/LPIPS/ECM comparisons on CelebA, FFHQ, and Helen at 4x and 8x upsampling. The central claims are that AffectSRNet outperforms existing FSR methods in emotion fidelity while remaining comparable in image quality, and that ECM is a useful new evaluation metric for emotion-aware super-resolution.

Significance. If the claims were established, the paper would address a real and under-explored problem: preserving facial expression information during face super-resolution for downstream FER applications. The architectural idea of injecting 3D landmark graph embeddings into a super-resolution backbone is plausible and the ablation study gives some evidence that the GCN+MSAF components help on standard image-quality metrics. However, the significance is undermined by the fact that the emotion-preservation claim rests entirely on an unvalidated metric, and by an internal inconsistency in which a component of that metric appears in the training loss. The manuscript does not include a user study, downstream FER accuracy evaluation, or predicted-label agreement analysis, so the headline claim is not currently supported by the evidence presented.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section III-A and Eq. (2)] Section III-A states that the emotion consistency losses 'are used as metrics and not used during training,' yet Eq. (2) defines Ltotal = k1·Lh_pix + k2·Lhist + k3·G_phi_j + k4·LL2 with k2=20. The term Lhist is not defined in Section III-E, but the only histogram-based quantity introduced in the paper is LH from Section III-A, which is a component of ECM. If Lhist is indeed LH, then the evaluation metric is part of the training objective, making the reported ECM comparisons circular. This contradiction must be resolved: either remove Lhist from the loss and explain what Lhist is, or acknowledge that ECM is optimized during training and provide an independent evaluation.
  2. [Section III-A and Tables I-III] The ECM is never validated as a measure of emotion preservation. It combines a test-set-level histogram difference and a mean absolute entropy difference, both computed from DDAMFN++ confidence scores. These marginal statistics can be unchanged even when per-image predicted emotion labels are wrong on every image, for example by permuting confidence scores across emotion classes within each image. The paper presents no calibration of ECM against human annotations, downstream FER accuracy, or per-image label agreement. Since the abstract and conclusion claim that AffectSRNet 'maintains the intensity and fidelity of facial expressions' and the experimental sections report emotion fidelity exclusively through ECM, the central claim is not established by the presented evidence.
  3. [Table I and Section IV-C.1] The text in Section IV-C.1 states that 'Across all three datasets, our method delivers results comparable to the state-of-the-art in PSNR, SSIM, and LPIPS while outperforming others in ECM.' This is contradicted by the FFHQ 4x row in Table I, where AffectSRNet reports LPIPS = 0.1260, while EDSR reports 0.0502 and FSRNet reports 0.0498. A roughly 2.5x worse LPIPS value is not 'comparable,' and it also places the method far behind two of the compared approaches. The claim of comparable visual quality is therefore not supported by the paper's own quantitative results.
  4. [Section IV-C.1 and Tables I-II] Several numerical results appear inconsistent or unexplained, which weakens confidence in the reported comparisons. For example, in Table I the Helen LPIPS for SRCNN is 0.556, which is dramatically worse than bicubic interpolation (0.1771) — an unusual outcome for a trained SR model. In the same table, SPARNet on FFHQ 4x shows LPIPS = 0.1878, far worse than EDSR and FSRNet, yet the qualitative discussion describes SPARNet as generally retaining texture. The paper should provide implementation details, error bars or statistical significance tests, and an explanation for these outliers before the quantitative comparisons can be taken at face value.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section I-A] The contribution bullet 'We provide comprehensive quantitative as well as quantitative comparisons' uses 'quantitative' twice; the second occurrence should presumably be 'qualitative.'
  2. [Section III-E.2] The perceptual loss is written only as the Gram matrix element G_phi_j(x)_c,c'; the actual style reconstruction loss should be a sum over channel pairs, but this sum is never defined. Please clarify the exact loss term used in Eq. (2).
  3. [Section III-E.3 and Eq. (1)] The L2 node-embedding loss in Eq. (1) refers to graphs G1 and G2, but neither graph is defined in the text. Presumably these are the landmark graphs extracted from the low-resolution input and the high-resolution target, but this must be stated explicitly.
  4. [Table III] The ablation table does not state the upsampling factor, although the text says the ablation is performed at 8x. Please add the scale to the table caption or header.
  5. [References] There are apparent reference errors: the same FSRNet paper appears as both [7] and [8], and the pose-estimation reference [24] is later cited for a face attention unit in Section II-C.1, which appears to be a different work. Please correct the citation numbering and deduplicate entries.
  6. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption says 'SRCN' instead of 'SRCNN.'

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Emotion-fidelity claim is partly circular: the ECM evaluation metric includes a histogram loss that Eq. (2) also uses in training, contradicting the paper's metric-only assertion.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III-A (Emotion Consistency Metric) and Section III-E Eq. (2)]
    "It is important to note that these are used as metrics and not used during training. ... The Histogram Loss LH between the confidence scores of the original image X and the super-resolved image IM is given by: LH = Σ_c (H(p^c_X) − H(p^c_IM))^2 ... ECM = αLH + log(Lconf) ... Ltotal = k1 · Lh_pix + k2 · Lhist + k3 · G^φ_j(x)c,c' + k4 · LL2 (2) ... values k1 = 1, k2 = 20, k3 = 50 and k4 = 0.1."

    The paper's emotion-fidelity claim is measured by ECM, which contains LH as a component with α = 0.5. The training objective in Eq. (2) includes k2·Lhist with weight 20, and the only histogram loss defined in the paper is LH from Section III-A. Therefore the network is explicitly trained to minimize a term of the very metric used to report emotion preservation. The ECM advantage over baselines—which are not trained with this loss—is partly forced by construction rather than being an independent measurement. This directly contradicts the Section III-A statement that these losses are used only as metrics and not during training.

full rationale

The visual-quality claims (PSNR/SSIM/LPIPS) are external, standard metrics and are not circular: the RRDB backbone and feature comparisons constitute an independent architecture evaluation. However, the central novelty of the paper is emotion fidelity, and that claim rests on ECM. ECM is defined as αLH + log(Lconf), and Eq. (2) trains AffectSRNet with k2 = 20 on Lhist, which is the same histogram loss LH. Thus the reported ECM superiority is partially a re-statement of the training objective. The paper's assertion in Section III-A that the emotion consistency losses are metric-only is internally inconsistent with Eq. (2). No load-bearing self-citation chain is present, and the metric's lack of external validation is a validity concern rather than a circularity in itself. Because only one of the two ECM terms (LH) is explicitly trained while log(Lconf) is not, the circularity is partial, warranting a 6 rather than an 8.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central emotion-preservation claim rests on a new, unvalidated metric, a single auxiliary FER model, hand-chosen hyperparameters, and an inconsistent loss formulation.

free parameters (3)
  • k1, k2, k3, k4 (loss weights) = 1, 20, 50, 0.1
    Hand-chosen hyperparameters in Eq. (2); no sensitivity analysis is provided. The emotion-preservation result depends on these weights.
  • alpha (ECM weight) = 0.5
    Hand-chosen combination weight in ECM = 0.5*L_H + log(L_conf); no justification or sensitivity study is given.
  • number of RRDB blocks and GCN layers = 8 RRDB blocks, 4 GCN layers
    Architecture hyperparameters chosen without ablations over depth.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption DDAMFN++ provides reliable emotion confidence estimates on both original and super-resolved images.
    The ECM metric and the emotion-fidelity claims depend entirely on this auxiliary FER model's outputs (Section III-A).
  • domain assumption Bicubic downsampling from HR to LR is an adequate model of the low-resolution conditions FER systems face.
    All training and testing generate LR inputs via bicubic interpolation (Section IV-A), so generalization to real surveillance degradations is assumed.
  • domain assumption The manually defined landmark graph edges preserve expression-relevant spatial relationships.
    The GCN embeddings encode only these edges; if the edge set omits expression-critical regions, the emotion-preservation mechanism fails (Section III-C, Fig. 3).
  • ad hoc to paper Lhist in Eq. (2) is a well-defined training loss.
    Lhist is never defined in the loss section and appears to conflict with the statement in Section III-A that emotion consistency losses are used only as metrics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AffectSRNet : Facial Emotion-Aware Super-Resolution Network." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NBQWXNRS

@misc{pith2026250209932,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AffectSRNet : Facial Emotion-Aware Super-Resolution Network},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NBQWXNRS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.09932}
}
read the original abstract

Facial expression recognition (FER) systems in low-resolution settings face significant challenges in accurately identifying expressions due to the loss of fine-grained facial details. This limitation is especially problematic for applications like surveillance and mobile communications, where low image resolution is common and can compromise recognition accuracy. Traditional single-image face super-resolution (FSR) techniques, however, often fail to preserve the emotional intent of expressions, introducing distortions that obscure the original affective content. Given the inherently ill-posed nature of single-image super-resolution, a targeted approach is required to balance image quality enhancement with emotion retention. In this paper, we propose AffectSRNet, a novel emotion-aware super-resolution framework that reconstructs high-quality facial images from low-resolution inputs while maintaining the intensity and fidelity of facial expressions. Our method effectively bridges the gap between image resolution and expression accuracy by employing an expression-preserving loss function, specifically tailored for FER applications. Additionally, we introduce a new metric to assess emotion preservation in super-resolved images, providing a more nuanced evaluation of FER system performance in low-resolution scenarios. Experimental results on standard datasets, including CelebA, FFHQ, and Helen, demonstrate that AffectSRNet outperforms existing FSR approaches in both visual quality and emotion fidelity, highlighting its potential for integration into practical FER applications. This work not only improves image clarity but also ensures that emotion-driven applications retain their core functionality in suboptimal resolution environments, paving the way for broader adoption in FER systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.09932 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of AffectSRNet with other super-resolution methods [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The network architecture of AffectSRNet. The super-resolution backbone consists of the RRDB and upsampling blocks from ESRGAN[82]. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The edges are defined as illustrated to preserve the spatial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The figure shows a visual comparison of leading methods applied to the Helen[43], FFHQ [32] and CelebA[55]. Visual results corresponding to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Subjective visual performance on real-world surveillance scenarios for 8× SR, of SCface dataset. Visual comparisons are shown on two sample [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    N. Akae, Y . Makihara, and Y . Yagi. Gait recognition using periodic temporal super resolution for low frame-rate videos. In 2011 international joint conference on biometrics (IJCB), pages 1–7. IEEE, 2011

    2011

  2. [2]

    Anwar, S

    S. Anwar, S. Khan, and N. Barnes. A deep journey into super- resolution: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) , 53(3):1–34, 2020

    2020

  3. [3]

    Bulat and G

    A. Bulat and G. Tzimiropoulos. Super-fan: Integrated facial landmark localization and super-resolution of real-world low resolution faces in arbitrary poses with gans. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 109–117, 2018

    2018

  4. [4]

    Bulat, J

    A. Bulat, J. Yang, and G. Tzimiropoulos. To learn image super- resolution, use a gan to learn how to do image degradation first. In Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), pages 185–200, 2018

    2018

  5. [5]

    Caballero, C

    J. Caballero, C. Ledig, A. Aitken, A. A. A. Diaz, L. Theis, F. Huszar, J. Totz, Z. Wang, and W. Shi. Real-time video super-resolution with spatio-temporal networks and motion compensation, June 30 2020. US Patent 10,701,394

    2020

  6. [6]

    C. Chen, D. Gong, H. Wang, Z. Li, and K. Y . K. Wong. Learning spatial attention for face super-resolution. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 30, 2021

    2021

  7. [7]

    Y . Chen, Y . Tai, X. Liu, C. Shen, and J. Yang. Fsrnet: End-to-end learning face super-resolution with facial priors. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 2492–2501, 2018

    2018

  8. [8]

    Y . Chen, Y . Tai, X. Liu, C. Shen, and J. Yang. Fsrnet: End-to-end learning face super-resolution with facial priors. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018

    2018

Show all 103 references
  1. [9]

    Y . Chen, R. Xia, K. Yang, and K. Zou. Mffn: image super-resolution via multi-level features fusion network. The Visual Computer , 40(2):489–504, 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    Chudasama, K

    V . Chudasama, K. Nighania, K. Upla, K. Raja, R. Ramachandra, and C. Busch. E-comsupresnet: Enhanced face super-resolution through compact network. IEEE Transactions on Biometrics, Behavior, and Identity Science, 3(2):166–179, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    T. Dai, J. Cai, Y . Zhang, S.-T. Xia, and L. Zhang. Second-order atten- tion network for single image super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 11065–11074, 2019

    2019

  4. [12]

    C. Dong, C. C. Loy, K. He, and X. Tang. Learning a deep convolutional network for image super-resolution. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2014: 13th European Conference, Zurich, Switzerland, September 6-12, 2014, Proceedings, Part IV 13 , pages 184–199. Springer, 2014

    2014

  5. [13]

    C. Dong, C. C. Loy, K. He, and X. Tang. Image super-resolution using deep convolutional networks. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence , 38(2):295–307, 2015

    2015

  6. [14]

    C. Dong, C. C. Loy, K. He, and X. Tang. Image super-resolution using deep convolutional networks, 2015

    2015

  7. [15]

    C. Dong, C. C. Loy, and X. Tang. Accelerating the super-resolution convolutional neural network. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2016: 14th European Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, October 11-14, 2016, Proceedings, Part II 14 , pages 391–407. Springer, 2016

    2016

  8. [16]

    H. Dou, C. Chen, X. Hu, Z. Xuan, Z. Hu, and S. Peng. Pca-srgan: Incremental orthogonal projection discrimination for face super- resolution. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM international conference on multimedia, pages 1891–1899, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Greenspan

    H. Greenspan. Super-resolution in medical imaging. The computer journal, 52(1):43–63, 2009

    2009

  10. [18]

    Grgic, K

    M. Grgic, K. Delac, and S. Grgic. Scface — surveillance cameras face database. Multimedia Tools Appl., 51(3):863–879, Feb. 2011

    2011

  11. [19]

    W. Han, S. Chang, D. Liu, M. Yu, M. Witbrock, and T. S. Huang. Image super-resolution via dual-state recurrent networks. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 1654–1663, 2018

    2018

  12. [20]

    Haris, G

    M. Haris, G. Shakhnarovich, and N. Ukita. Deep back-projection networks for super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 1664–1673, 2018

    2018

  13. [21]

    Haris, G

    M. Haris, G. Shakhnarovich, and N. Ukita. Recurrent back-projection network for video super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 3897– 3906, 2019

    2019

  14. [22]

    J. He, W. Shi, K. Chen, L. Fu, and C. Dong. Gcfsr: a generative and controllable face super resolution method without facial and gan priors. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 1889–1898, 2022

    2022

  15. [23]

    C. Hong, J. Yu, D. Tao, and M. Wang. Image-based three-dimensional human pose recovery by multiview locality-sensitive sparse retrieval. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 62(6):3742–3751, 2014

    2014

  16. [24]

    C. Hong, J. Yu, J. Wan, D. Tao, and M. Wang. Multimodal deep autoencoder for human pose recovery. IEEE transactions on image processing, 24(12):5659–5670, 2015

    2015

  17. [25]

    Huang, R

    H. Huang, R. He, Z. Sun, and T. Tan. Wavelet-srnet: A wavelet- based cnn for multi-scale face super resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision , pages 1689– 1697, 2017

    2017

  18. [26]

    S.-R. Imaging. by p. milanfar, 2010

    2010

  19. [27]

    Irani and S

    M. Irani and S. Peleg. Improving resolution by image registration. CVGIP: Graphical models and image processing , 53(3):231–239, 1991

    1991

  20. [28]

    J. S. Isaac and R. Kulkarni. Super resolution techniques for medical image processing. In 2015 International Conference on Technologies for Sustainable Development (ICTSD) , pages 1–6. IEEE, 2015

    2015

  21. [29]

    Jiang, C

    J. Jiang, C. Wang, X. Liu, and J. Ma. Deep learning-based face super- resolution: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) , 55(1):1–36, 2021

    2021

  22. [30]

    Jiang, Z

    K. Jiang, Z. Wang, P. Yi, T. Lu, J. Jiang, and Z. Xiong. Dual-path deep fusion network for face image hallucination. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , 33(1):378–391, 2020

    2020

  23. [31]

    Kalarot, T

    R. Kalarot, T. Li, and F. Porikli. Component attention guided face super-resolution network: Cagface. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision , pages 370– 380, 2020

    2020

  24. [32]

    Karras, S

    T. Karras, S. Laine, and T. Aila. A style-based generator architecture for generative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 4401– 4410, 2019

    2019

  25. [33]

    Kartynnik, A

    Y . Kartynnik, A. Ablavatski, I. Grishchenko, and M. Grundmann. Real-time facial surface geometry from monocular video on mobile gpus. In CVPR Workshop on Computer Vision for Augmented and Virtual Reality 2019 , Long Beach, CA, 2019

    2019

  26. [34]

    D. Kim, M. Kim, G. Kwon, and D.-S. Kim. Progressive face super- resolution via attention to face landmark. In the 30th British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC) 2019 . the 30th British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC) 2019, 2019

    2019

  27. [35]

    J. Kim, J. K. Lee, and K. M. Lee. Accurate image super-resolution using very deep convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 1646– 1654, 2016

    2016

  28. [36]

    J. Kim, J. K. Lee, and K. M. Lee. Deeply-recursive convolutional network for image super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 1637– 1645, 2016

    2016

  29. [37]

    J. Kim, G. Li, I. Yun, C. Jung, and J. Kim. Edge and identity preserv- ing network for face super-resolution. Neurocomputing, 446:11–22, 2021

    2021

  30. [38]

    T. N. Kipf and M. Welling. Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks, 2017

    2017

  31. [39]

    Ko and B.-R

    S. Ko and B.-R. Dai. Multi-laplacian gan with edge enhancement for face super resolution. In 2020 25th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), pages 3505–3512. IEEE, 2021

    2020

  32. [40]

    Lai, J.-B

    W.-S. Lai, J.-B. Huang, N. Ahuja, and M.-H. Yang. Deep laplacian pyramid networks for fast and accurate super-resolution. In IEEE Conferene on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2017

    2017

  33. [41]

    Lai, J.-B

    W.-S. Lai, J.-B. Huang, N. Ahuja, and M.-H. Yang. Fast and accu- rate image super-resolution with deep laplacian pyramid networks. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence , 41(11):2599–2613, 2018

    2018

  34. [42]

    C. P. Lau, C. D. Castillo, and R. Chellappa. Atfacegan: Single face semantic aware image restoration and recognition from atmospheric turbulence. IEEE Transactions on Biometrics, Behavior, and Identity Science, 3(2):240–251, 2021

    2021

  35. [43]

    V . Le, J. Brandt, Z. Lin, L. Bourdev, and T. Huang. Interactive facial feature localization. In Computer Vision, ECCV 2012 - 12th Euro- pean Conference on Computer Vision, Proceedings , number PART 3 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in A...

    2012

  36. [44]

    Ledig, L

    C. Ledig, L. Theis, F. Husz ´ar, J. Caballero, A. Cunningham, A. Acosta, A. Aitken, A. Tejani, J. Totz, Z. Wang, et al. Photo- realistic single image super-resolution using a generative adversarial network. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern r...

    2017

  37. [45]

    F. Li, X. Feng, F. Chen, G. Lu, and W. Pei. Learning generalizable latent representations for novel degradations in super-resolution. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multime- dia, pages 1797–1807, 2022

    2022

  38. [46]

    J. Li, J. Feng, and C.-C. J. Kuo. Deep convolutional neural network for latent fingerprint enhancement. Signal Processing: Image Communication, 60:52–63, 2018

    2018

  39. [47]

    K. Li, B. Bare, B. Yan, B. Feng, and C. Yao. Face hallucination based on key parts enhancement. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , pages 1378–

    2018

  40. [48]

    K. Li, Y . Zhu, J. Yang, and J. Jiang. Video super-resolution using an adaptive superpixel-guided auto-regressive model. Pattern Recognition, 51:59–71, 2016

    2016

  41. [49]

    X. Li, Y . Wu, W. Zhang, R. Wang, and F. Hou. Deep learning methods in real-time image super-resolution: a survey. Journal of Real-Time Image Processing, 17(6):1885–1909, 2020

    1909

  42. [50]

    Z. Li, J. Yang, Z. Liu, X. Yang, G. Jeon, and W. Wu. Feedback network for image super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 3867– 3876, 2019

    2019

  43. [51]

    Lillesand, R

    T. Lillesand, R. W. Kiefer, and J. Chipman. Remote sensing and image interpretation. John Wiley & Sons, 2015

    2015

  44. [52]

    B. Lim, S. Son, H. Kim, S. Nah, and K. M. Lee. Enhanced deep residual networks for single image super-resolution, 2017

    2017

  45. [53]

    B. Lim, S. Son, H. Kim, S. Nah, and K. Mu Lee. Enhanced deep residual networks for single image super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops, pages 136–144, 2017

    2017

  46. [54]

    S. Liu, C. Xiong, and Z. Gao. Face super-resolution network with incremental enhancement of facial parsing information. In 2020 25th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR) , pages 7537–7543. IEEE, 2021

    2020

  47. [55]

    Z. Liu, P. Luo, X. Wang, and X. Tang. Deep learning face attributes in the wild. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), December 2015

    2015

  48. [56]

    A. P. Lobanov. Resolution limits in astronomical images. arXiv preprint astro-ph/0503225, 2005

    2005 arXiv

  49. [57]

    T. Lu, Y . Wang, Y . Zhang, Y . Wang, L. Wei, Z. Wang, and J. Jiang. Face hallucination via split-attention in split-attention network. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM international conference on multime- dia, pages 5501–5509, 2021

    2021

  50. [58]

    C. Ma, Z. Jiang, Y . Rao, J. Lu, and J. Zhou. Deep face super- resolution with iterative collaboration between attentive recovery and landmark estimation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 5569–5578, 2020

    2020

  51. [59]

    C. Ma, Z. Jiang, Y . Rao, J. Lu, and J. Zhou. Deep face super- resolution with iterative collaboration between attentive recovery and landmark estimation. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2020

    2020

  52. [60]

    Michaeli and M

    T. Michaeli and M. Irani. Nonparametric blind super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 945–952, 2013

    2013

  53. [61]

    Nasrollahi, S

    K. Nasrollahi, S. Escalera, P. Rasti, G. Anbarjafari, X. Baro, H. J. Escalante, and T. B. Moeslund. Deep learning based super-resolution for improved action recognition. In 2015 International Conference on Image Processing Theory, Tools and Applications (IPTA) , pages 67–72. I...

    2015

  54. [62]

    Paszke, S

    A. Paszke, S. Gross, S. Chintala, G. Chanan, E. Yang, Z. DeVito, Z. Lin, A. Desmaison, L. Antiga, and A. Lerer. Automatic differen- tiation in pytorch. 2017

    2017

  55. [63]

    Rasti, T

    P. Rasti, T. Uiboupin, S. Escalera, and G. Anbarjafari. Convolutional neural network super resolution for face recognition in surveillance monitoring. In International conference on articulated motion and deformable objects, pages 175–184. Springer, 2016

    2016

  56. [64]

    M. S. Ryoo, B. Rothrock, C. Fleming, and H. J. Yang. Privacy- preserving human activity recognition from extreme low resolution. In Thirty-First AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 2017

    2017

  57. [65]

    W. Shi, J. Caballero, F. Husz ´ar, J. Totz, A. P. Aitken, R. Bishop, D. Rueckert, and Z. Wang. Real-time single image and video super- resolution using an efficient sub-pixel convolutional neural network. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern rec...

    2016

  58. [67]

    zero-shot

    A. Shocher, N. Cohen, and M. Irani. “zero-shot” super-resolution using deep internal learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 3118–3126, 2018

    2018

  59. [68]

    Singh, A

    K. Singh, A. Gupta, and R. Kapoor. Fingerprint image super- resolution via ridge orientation-based clustered coupled sparse dic- tionaries. Journal of Electronic Imaging , 24(4):043015, 2015

    2015

  60. [69]

    L. Su, C. Hu, G. Li, and D. Cao. Msaf: Multimodal split attention fusion, 2020

    2020

  61. [70]

    B. Sun, Y . Zhang, S. Jiang, and Y . Fu. Hybrid pixel-unshuffled network for lightweight image super-resolution. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume 37, pages 2375– 2383, 2023

    2023

  62. [71]

    Swaminathan, M

    A. Swaminathan, M. Wu, and K. R. Liu. Digital image forensics via intrinsic fingerprints. IEEE transactions on information forensics and security, 3(1):101–117, 2008

    2008

  63. [72]

    Y . Tai, J. Yang, and X. Liu. Image super-resolution via deep recursive residual network. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 3147–3155, 2017

    2017

  64. [73]

    Y . Tai, J. Yang, X. Liu, and C. Xu. Memnet: A persistent memory network for image restoration. In Proceedings of the IEEE interna- tional conference on computer vision , pages 4539–4547, 2017

    2017

  65. [74]

    Timofte, R

    R. Timofte, R. Rothe, and L. Van Gool. Seven ways to improve example-based single image super resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 1865–1873, 2016

    2016

  66. [75]

    A. S. Tomar, K. Arya, and S. S. Rajput. Deep hyfeat based attention in attention model for face super-resolution. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement , 72:1–11, 2023

    2023

  67. [76]

    T. Tong, G. Li, X. Liu, and Q. Gao. Image super-resolution using dense skip connections. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision , pages 4799–4807, 2017

    2017

  68. [77]

    Ulyanov, A

    D. Ulyanov, A. Vedaldi, and V . Lempitsky. Improved texture net- works: Maximizing quality and diversity in feed-forward stylization and texture synthesis, 2017

    2017

  69. [78]

    Ulyanov, A

    D. Ulyanov, A. Vedaldi, and V . Lempitsky. Instance normalization: The missing ingredient for fast stylization, 2017

    2017

  70. [79]

    C. Wang, J. Jiang, and X. Liu. Heatmap-aware pyramid face hallucination. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME) , pages 1–6. IEEE, 2021

    2021

  71. [80]

    C. Wang, J. Jiang, Z. Zhong, D. Zhai, and X. Liu. Super-resolving face image by facial parsing information. IEEE Transactions on Biometrics, Behavior, and Identity Science , 5(4):435–448, 2023

    2023

  72. [81]

    H. Wang, Q. Hu, C. Wu, J. Chi, X. Yu, and H. Wu. Dclnet: Dual closed-loop networks for face super-resolution. Knowledge-Based Systems, 222:106987, 2021

    2021

  73. [82]

    X. Wang, K. Yu, S. Wu, J. Gu, Y . Liu, C. Dong, Y . Qiao, and C. Change Loy. Esrgan: Enhanced super-resolution generative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) Workshops , September 2018

    2018

  74. [83]

    Y . Wang, F. Perazzi, B. McWilliams, A. Sorkine-Hornung, O. Sorkine-Hornung, and C. Schroers. A fully progressive approach to single-image super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE confer- ence on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops , pages 864–873, 2018

    2018

  75. [84]

    Wang and A

    Z. Wang and A. C. Bovik. A universal image quality index. IEEE Signal Processing Letters , 9:81–84, 2002

    2002

  76. [85]

    Z. Wang, J. Chen, and S. C. Hoi. Deep learning for image super- resolution: A survey. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 43(10):3365–3387, 2020

    2020

  77. [86]

    L. Yang, S. Wang, S. Ma, W. Gao, C. Liu, P. Wang, and P. Ren. Hifacegan: Face renovation via collaborative suppression and replen- ishment. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM international conference on multimedia, pages 1551–1560, 2020

    2020

  78. [87]

    Y . Yin, J. Robinson, Y . Zhang, and Y . Fu. Joint super-resolution and alignment of tiny faces. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 34, pages 12693–12700, 2020

    2020

  79. [88]

    Yu and F

    X. Yu and F. Porikli. Ultra-resolving face images by discriminative generative networks. In European conference on computer vision , pages 318–333. Springer, 2016

    2016

  80. [89]

    Y . Yuan, S. Liu, J. Zhang, Y . Zhang, C. Dong, and L. Lin. Un- supervised image super-resolution using cycle-in-cycle generative adversarial networks. pages 814–81409, 06 2018

    2018

  81. [90]

    Zhang, Z

    H. Zhang, Z. Yang, L. Zhang, and H. Shen. Super-resolution reconstruction for multi-angle remote sensing images considering resolution differences. Remote Sensing, 6(1):637–657, 2014

    2014

  82. [91]

    Zhang, L

    H. Zhang, L. Zhang, and H. Shen. A super-resolution reconstruction algorithm for hyperspectral images. Signal Processing, 92(9):2082– 2096, 2012

    2012

  83. [92]

    Zhang, J

    J. Zhang, J. Pu, C. Chen, and R. Fleischer. Low-resolution gait recognition. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics), 40(4):986–996, 2010

    2010

  84. [93]

    Zhang, H

    L. Zhang, H. Zhang, H. Shen, and P. Li. A super-resolution reconstruction algorithm for surveillance images. Signal Processing, 90(3):848–859, 2010

    2010

  85. [94]

    Zhang and Q

    M. Zhang and Q. Ling. Supervised pixel-wise gan for face super- resolution. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , 23:1938–1950, 2020

    1938

  86. [95]

    Zhang, P

    R. Zhang, P. Isola, A. A. Efros, E. Shechtman, and O. Wang. The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric. In 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 586–595, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, Jun

    2018

  87. [96]

    Zhang, Y

    S. Zhang, Y . Zhang, Y . Zhang, Y . Wang, and Z. Song. A dual- direction attention mixed feature network for facial expression recog- nition. Electronics, 12(17):3595, 2023

    2023

  88. [97]

    Zhang, K

    Y . Zhang, K. Li, K. Li, L. Wang, B. Zhong, and Y . Fu. Image super- resolution using very deep residual channel attention networks. In Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), pages 286–301, 2018

    2018

  89. [98]

    Zhang, Y

    Y . Zhang, Y . Wu, and L. Chen. Msfsr: A multi-stage face super- resolution with accurate facial representation via enhanced facial boundaries. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops , pages 504–505, 2020

    2020

  90. [99]

    Zhao and C

    T. Zhao and C. Zhang. Saan: Semantic attention adaptation network for face super-resolution. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME) , pages 1–6. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  91. [100]

    Zheng, W

    C. Zheng, W. Wu, C. Chen, T. Yang, S. Zhu, J. Shen, N. Kehtarnavaz, and M. Shah. Deep learning-based human pose estimation: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys , 56(1):1–37, 2023

    2023

  92. [101]

    Zhong, X

    Z. Zhong, X. Liu, J. Jiang, D. Zhao, and X. Ji. Guided depth map super-resolution: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys , 55(14s):1–36, 2023

    2023

  93. [102]

    E. Zhou, H. Fan, Z. Cao, Y . Jiang, and Q. Yin. Learning face hallucination in the wild. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume 29, 2015

    2015

  94. [103]

    J.-Y . Zhu, T. Park, P. Isola, and A. A. Efros. Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle-consistent adversarial networks. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages 2242– 2251, 2017

    2017

  95. [2018]

    IEEE Computer Society

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.