Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 27 references

Towards Adaptive Super-Resolution and Quality Assessment via Test-Time Adaptation

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that adapting a no-reference quality model to each test batch produces a perceptual loss that consistently improves every super-resolution backbone and dataset it tests, and that region-aware test-time adaptation…

desk verdict A doctoral research summary that compiles three already-published frameworks; the only new content is a table with an unnamed metric, which makes the central claim unverifiable. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08508 v1 pith:MFFHF6AC submitted 2026-08-09 cs.CV

Ajeet Kumar Verma This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords Test-TimeAdaptationVideoQualityAssessmentAdaptiveLossSuper-ResolutionScreenContentImagesPerceptualCharacterErrorRateContrastive
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

Real-world video super-resolution often meets distortions—compression, noise, motion blur—that no training set fully covers, and high-resolution ground truth is usually absent at deployment. The paper's central claim is that a no-reference video-quality model can be adapted on the fly to the statistics of each test video, and the gap between the quality scores it assigns to the super-resolved and reference versions can then be used as an adaptive loss. According to the reported numbers, this adaptive loss improves all six super-resolution backbones on all four real-world degraded datasets, with the largest gains where distortion is most severe. For screen content, the paper further claims that text-aware losses in a transformer-based SR model and a region-aware test-time adaptation step reduce character error rates and improve perceptual metrics without ground-truth supervision at adaptation time. If the claims hold, super-resolution becomes self-adjusting at inference time, a practical path toward deployment on heterogeneous devices and network conditions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is test-time adaptation of a quality network. On each batch of test video, only the normalization-layer parameters are updated under two auxiliary objectives, Quality-Based Group Contrastive Loss (clips of similar quality are pulled together in the embedding space) and Quality-Aware Rank Loss (predicted quality ordering is kept consistent), so the pretrained model shifts to the current distortion distribution without discarding learned semantics. The adaptive quality loss is then the difference between the quality scores assigned to the super-resolved and reference videos, used as a perceptual regularizer alongside pixel and adversarial losses. For screen content, the machinery is text-aware supervision: a character error rate loss, a CLIP-based quality loss, and a VGG perceptual loss in the supervised transformer model, plus a region-aware two-stage test-time adaptation in which text regions are refined with OCR and small-language-model feedback and non-text regions are refined against a cleaned reference produced by a lightweight restoration network.

What would settle it

Run the adaptive quality loss on heavily distorted real-world videos that also have human opinion scores, and have viewers choose between base and adapted outputs; if the adapted output is preferred no more often than chance in the clips where the quality model and humans disagree most, the claim that score matching improves perceived quality is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery, stated on its own terms, is that test-time adaptation makes a no-reference quality model a usable perceptual supervisor for super-resolution. Updating only the normalization layers of a pretrained video quality assessment network, with a quality-based group contrastive loss and a quality-aware rank loss, lets the model track the current distortion mix; the difference between the quality scores of the super-resolved and reference videos then defines an adaptive loss. Across BasicVSR, RBVSR, HAT, SRWD, RESR, and IART, adding this loss improves the reported average quality score on every one of the RVSR, VLQ, K|Lens, and MotionBlur datasets, with the clearest gains where distortion is severe. A second line of results claims that a transformer-based screen-content SR model trained with character error rate, CLIP-based perceptual, and VGG losses beats its baselines in PSNR, SSIM, and CER across quantization levels, and that a region-aware dual-branch test-time adaptation reduces character error and improves perceptual metrics for five screen-content backbones.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the adapted quality model's scores align with human perception on the specific distortions in the test video, so making super-resolved output match those scores actually makes it look better rather than merely matching the model's own biases.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • An existing video super-resolution model can be upgraded at inference time by adding the adaptive quality loss, with no retraining of the SR weights.
  • No-reference video quality assessment itself becomes more reliable under unseen distortion mixtures after test-time adaptation, as shown by rank-correlation gains on five QA baselines.
  • Screen-content super-resolution can target readable text and sharp structure rather than only pixel fidelity, with lower character error rates across compression levels.
  • Region-aware test-time adaptation transfers to backbones not designed for text, reducing character error and improving perceptual scores for all five screen-content baselines tested.
  • Because the methods operate per frame, temporal consistency and flicker reduction remain open, as the paper itself notes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension the paper leaves implicit is to use the same score-matching loss for other restoration tasks, such as deblurring or compression-artifact removal, where a test-adapted quality model could replace hand-designed regularizers.
  • The pattern of gains in Table 1, with the largest gain for the lightweight single-branch VQA model, suggests that the amount of improvement from test-time adaptation may depend on how far the baseline already generalizes; that could be tested by correlating gain size with baseline cross-distortion performance.
  • The text branch of SCISR-TTA leans on OCR feedback, so a concrete failure test is to break the OCR step and check whether the character error rate gains disappear; the paper does not report this ablation.
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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper, framed as a doctoral research summary, proposes three test-time adaptation (TTA) frameworks for video/image super-resolution and quality assessment: (i) a TTA method for no-reference video quality assessment (RW-VSR-QA) whose adapted quality scores are used as an adaptive loss to guide real-world video super-resolution; (ii) ScrVSR, a transformer-based screen-content video super-resolution model trained with text-aware and perceptual losses; and (iii) SCISR-TTA, a region-aware TTA strategy that adapts screen-content super-resolution models separately on text and non-text regions. The claimed contributions are consistent improvements in perceptual quality and readability across multiple backbones and datasets, with experimental tables supporting each component, and the paper explicitly lists its temporal-modeling limitation as future work.

Significance. If the central claims are correct, the paper would offer a practically valuable recipe for guiding super-resolution at test time without paired high-resolution data, using a TTA-adapted quality model as a loss. The idea is timely and the paper is clearly written in parts, with results reported across several backbones and datasets. The paper also honestly discloses prior publications [19]–[21] for each component and includes an explicit limitations section. However, the evidence presented here is not self-contained: key protocols and metrics are deferred to prior papers, and the main quantitative support (Table 2) does not name its evaluation metric, which creates a risk of circularity because the same quality model supplies both the adaptive loss and, potentially, the reported score. The absence of error bars or significance tests further weakens the strength of the 'consistent improvements' claim.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.1, Method Part-II; Table 2] Table 2 never states the evaluation metric behind the reported numbers or the 'Avg.' column. Since the adaptive quality loss is defined as the difference between SR and HR quality scores produced by the RW-VSR-QA model, if Table 2 reports exactly those scores, then updating the SR network to minimize the loss would improve the table by construction even if human-perceived quality did not improve. The authors should name the metric, state whether it is the RW-VSR-QA score itself or an independent metric, and report at least one metric that is not used as a training objective.
  2. [Section 3.1, Method Part-II; Section 2] The adaptive quality loss is the difference between the quality scores of SR and HR videos, but Section 2 states that no high-resolution reference is available at inference time. The manuscript does not specify how the HR quality score is obtained in the test-time setting; it refers to prior work [20] for that procedure. For the present manuscript to establish the claim on its own, it needs to describe or justify the availability of the HR reference used for the loss.
  3. [Table 2; Section 3.1 Results] The claim of 'consistent improvements across all backbones and datasets' is quantitatively weak in several entries; for example, HAT_Q improves over HAT by only 0.0001 in Avg., and COVER's SRCC gain in Table 1 is only 0.45%. None of the tables reports error bars, confidence intervals, or significance tests, so it is unclear whether any of the smaller gains are statistically distinguishable from noise. I recommend reporting variance over runs or at least identifying which gains exceed a meaningful threshold.
  4. [Table 4] The arrow for DISTS is marked as ↑ (higher is better), but the standard definition of DISTS [11] uses lower values to indicate higher similarity. If the table values follow the standard definition, the direction is wrong; if the values have been transformed (for example, negated or inverted), the transformation is not explained. In addition, EIQM decreases for ITSRN_ada (0.1655 to 0.1636) and LIIF_ada (0.2089 to 0.2035) relative to their baselines, so the sentence claiming that SCISR-TTA 'consistently improves both text fidelity and perceptual quality' is not fully supported by the table.
  5. [Section 6; Section 3.1 Results] The paper acknowledges that the proposed methods operate on individual frames and do not explicitly model temporal dependencies. Since the headline results are for video super-resolution, the absence of any temporal-consistency metric (for example, flicker or temporal stability) means the claim of improved perceptual quality for videos is incomplete. A frame-wise perceptual improvement does not automatically translate to a better video viewing experience, yet the paper's central 'consistent improvements across all backbones and datasets' claim is made without temporal evaluation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [References] Reference [1] contains a truncated author name, 'Del B, A.', and several references contain typographical spacing artifacts such as 'W ang' and 'Y an'; these should be corrected.
  2. [Section 3.3] The natural-scene loss expression 'L_ns = ||I_ns - Ibar_ns||_2^2' is not numbered or clearly typeset; consider formatting it as a numbered equation.
  3. [Figure 1] The qualitative comparison in Figure 1 relies on red, blue, and yellow highlighted regions, but the caption does not explain the color coding for all panels; please label the crops directly for readability.
  4. [Section 3.1 Results] The sentence 'This work has been published in IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence [20]' appears abruptly at the end of the Results paragraph; consider moving publication notes to a separate 'Publication Note' or footnote.
  5. [Abstract; Section 3.3] The abstract claims 'consistent improvements in perceptual quality and readability', but Table 4 shows EIQM decreasing for two of the four baselines; please align the abstract's wording with the actual table results or clarify why those decreases are not considered counterexamples.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The Table 2 'performance' metric is unnamed, and the only defined score is the RW-VSR-QA score used as the loss, making the reported improvements potentially the optimized objective itself.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.1, Method Part-II (adaptive quality loss) and Table 2 caption/results]
    "An efficient SR model should generate videos whose quality scores closely match those of HR videos; the difference between these scores forms the adaptive quality loss. ... Table 2: Quantitative comparison of various VSR models and their enhanced versions using the proposed RW-VSR-QA algorithm as an adaptive loss. ... Higher values represent better results."

    The loss is defined as L = |Q(SR) - Q(HR)|, where Q is the RW-VSR-QA score. Table 2 reports 'Avg.↑' and 'Higher values represent better results' but never names an external metric; within this manuscript, the only scores introduced are Q's predictions. Minimizing L directly moves Q(SR) toward Q(HR), so any _Q model should register higher values on a table that, as written, is consistent with reporting Q(SR). The claimed 'consistent improvements across all backbones and datasets' can therefore be the training objective itself, not an independent test of perceptual quality. The caption's phrase 'using the proposed RW-VSR-QA algorithm as an adaptive loss' reinforces that the table and the loss share the same model.

full rationale

The strongest circularity risk is confined to Section 3.1 and Table 2. There, the adaptive quality loss is the difference between RW-VSR-QA scores for SR and HR videos, yet Table 2 never states what quantity is being averaged; the only score defined in the manuscript is the RW-VSR-QA prediction itself, and no procedure for obtaining the HR score is given. If Table 2 reports RW-VSR-QA scores, then the _Q models improve by construction because the SR network is explicitly trained to move Q(SR) toward Q(HR). The full experimental protocol is also delegated to the author's own IEEE TAI paper [20], so the manuscript alone does not allow a reader to verify whether an independent metric was used. By contrast, the ScrVSR and SCISR-TTA sections use external metrics such as PSNR, SSIM, CER, DFSS, DISTS, AFINE, and EIQM, and no similar construction-based reduction is evident there; their self-citations [19] and [21] point to published prior work and are not by themselves circular. The acknowledged temporal-modeling limitation in Section 6 is a scope limitation, not a circularity issue. Overall, the central RW-VSR-QA claim is partially circular as written, because the reported Table 2 improvement is indistinguishable from the fitted loss being optimized.

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

No new free parameters or entities are introduced in this summary; the frameworks are taken from the author's own prior publications. The listed axioms are the load-bearing domain assumptions the claimed gains depend on, none of which are derived or ablated in this manuscript.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Updating only normalization layer parameters of a pretrained VQA network preserves semantic knowledge while adapting to a new test distribution.
    Invoked in Section 3.1 Method Part-I without evidence in this paper; no analysis shows that normalization-only updates are sufficient or safe.
  • domain assumption Group contrastive loss and quality-aware rank loss provide reliable self-supervised training signals for quality assessment without subjective labels.
    Stated in Section 3.1; the paper provides no derivation or ablation showing these losses improve alignment with human opinion scores.
  • domain assumption The NAFNet-based restoration network provides a clean reference for non-text regions with no additional supervision.
    Used in Section 3.3 to define the natural-scene loss L_ns; the reference generator is kept fixed, and errors in its output would propagate into the adaptation objective.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Towards Adaptive Super-Resolution and Quality Assessment via Test-Time Adaptation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MFFHF6AC

@misc{pith2026260808508,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Towards Adaptive Super-Resolution and Quality Assessment via Test-Time Adaptation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MFFHF6AC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08508}
}
read the original abstract

This paper presents doctoral research on adaptive video super-resolution and perceptual quality modeling under real-world conditions. Existing video super-resolution (VSR) methods struggle to generalize under unknown degradations arising from heterogeneous devices, codecs, and network environments. We address this challenge through test-time adaptation (TTA), a unified paradigm that improves robustness and perceptual quality without retraining or high-quality supervision. Specifically, we: 1) propose a TTA-based framework for no-reference video quality assessment (VQA), where adapted quality predictions provide perceptual guidance for VSR under unseen distortions; 2) develop a transformer-based architecture for screen-content super-resolution that preserves text clarity and structural fidelity; and 3) introduce a region-aware TTA strategy that selectively refines text and non-text regions without requiring high-resolution ground truth. Experimental results across diverse benchmarks demonstrate consistent improvements in perceptual quality and readability. We also outline ongoing work toward fully adaptive video enhancement systems capable of generalizing across unseen domains.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.08508 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Qualitative comparison between Baseline and its adapted version. The cropped LR region is highlighted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of the proposed TTA-based RW-VSR-QA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overview of the proposed RW-VSR framework us [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Overview of the proposed ScrVSR model. Training [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Overview of the proposed SCISR-TTA. The underly [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [19]

    K., Jakhetiya, V., and Subudhi, B

    Verma, A. K., Jakhetiya, V., and Subudhi, B. N.Scisr-tta: Test time adaptation for screen content image super resolution. In2026 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo Workshops (ICMEW)(2026), IEEE, pp. 1–6

    work page 2026

  2. [20]

    K., Mishra, A., Jakhetiya, V., Subudhi, B

    Verma, A. K., Mishra, A., Jakhetiya, V., Subudhi, B. N., and Jaiswal, S.Real- world video quality assessment via test-time adaptation and its application in real-world video super-resolution.IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [21]

    K., Tripathi, S., Jakhetiya, V., Subudhi, B

    Verma, A. K., Tripathi, S., Jakhetiya, V., Subudhi, B. N., and Jaiswal, S.Scrvsr: Screen sharing video super-resolution. In2025 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo Workshops (ICMEW)(2025), IEEE, pp. 1–6

    work page 2025

  4. [11]

    P.Image quality assessment: Unifying structure and texture similarity.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 44, 5 (2020), 2567–2581

    Ding, K., Ma, K., Wang, S., and Simoncelli, E. P.Image quality assessment: Unifying structure and texture similarity.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 44, 5 (2020), 2567–2581

    work page 2020

  5. [1]

    InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision(2024), pp

    Agnolucci, L., Galteri, L., Bertini, M., and Del B, A.Arniqa: Learning distortion manifold for image quality assessment. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision(2024), pp. 189–198

    work page 2024

  6. [2]

    InIEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition(2022)

    Chan, K., Zhou, S., Xu, X., and Loy, C.BasicVSR++: Improving video super- resolution with enhanced propagation and alignment. InIEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition(2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [3]

    C.Investigating tradeoffs in real-world video super-resolution

    Chan, K., Zhou, S., Xu, X., and Loy, C. C.Investigating tradeoffs in real-world video super-resolution. InIEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition(2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [4]

    Chen, B., Zhu, H., Zhu, L., W ang, S., and Kwong, S.Deep feature statistics map- ping for generalized screen content image quality assessment.IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 33(2024), 3227–3241

    work page 2024

Show all 27 references
  1. [5]

    InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference(2025), pp

    Chen, D., Wu, T., Ma, K., and Zhang, L.Toward generalized image quality assessment: Relaxing the perfect reference quality assumption. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference(2025), pp. 12742–12752

    2025

  2. [6]

    InEuropean conference on computer vision(2022), Springer, pp

    Chen, L., Chu, X., Zhang, X., and Sun, J.Simple baselines for image restoration. InEuropean conference on computer vision(2022), Springer, pp. 17–33

    2022

  3. [7]

    InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition(2023), pp

    Chen, X., W ang, X., Zhou, J., Qiao, Y., and Dong, C.Activating more pixels in image super-resolution transformer. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition(2023), pp. 22367–22377

    2023

  4. [8]

    InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition(2021), pp

    Chen, Y., Liu, S., and Wang, X.Learning continuous image representation with local implicit image function. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition(2021), pp. 8628–8638

    2021

  5. [9]

    Chu, M., Xie, Y., Jonas, M., Laura, L., and Thuerey, N.Learning temporal coherence via self-supervision for gan-based video generation (tecogan).ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 39, 4 (2020)

    2020

  6. [10]

    InComputer Graphics Forum(2024), vol

    Çoğalan, U., Bemana, M., Seidel, H.-P., and Myszkowski, K.Enhancing image quality prediction with self-supervised visual masking. InComputer Graphics Forum(2024), vol. 43, Wiley Online Library, p. e15051

    2024

  7. [12]

    InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition(2024), pp

    He, C., Zheng, Q., Zhu, R., Zeng, X., Fan, Y., and Tu, Z.Cover: A comprehensive video quality evaluator. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition(2024), pp. 5799–5809

    2024

  8. [13]

    Expanding synthetic real-world degradations for blind video super resolution

    Jeelani, M., Cheema, N., Illgner-Fehns, K., Slusallek, P., Jaiswal, S., et al. Expanding synthetic real-world degradations for blind video super resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (2023), pp. 1199–1208

    2023

  9. [14]

    H.Local texture estimator for implicit representation func- tion

    Lee, J., and Jin, K. H.Local texture estimator for implicit representation func- tion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition(2022), pp. 1929–1938

    2022

  10. [15]

    In2025 Data Compression Conference (DCC)(2025), IEEE, pp

    Li, J., Li, Y., Lin, C., Zhang, K., and Zhang, L.Compressed screen content image enhancement with b-spline based distortion estimation. In2025 Data Compression Conference (DCC)(2025), IEEE, pp. 93–102

    2025

  11. [16]

    InProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops(2017), pp

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

    2017

  12. [17]

    InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence(2024), vol

    Liu, Y., Quan, Y., Xiao, G., Li, A., and Wu, J.Scaling and masking: A new paradigm of data sampling for image and video quality assessment. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence(2024), vol. 38, pp. 3792–3801

    2024

  13. [18]

    Naderi, B., Cutler, R., Cho, J., Khongbantabam, N., and Ivkovic, D.Icme 2025 grand challenge on video super-resolution for video conferencing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.12269(2025)

    2025 arXiv

  14. [22]

    InInternational Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW)(2021)

    Wang, X., Xie, L., Dong, C., and Shan, Y.Real-esrgan: Training real-world blind super-resolution with pure synthetic data. InInternational Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW)(2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    Fast-vqa: Efficient end-to-end video quality assessment with fragment sampling

    Wu, H., Chen, C., Hou, J., Liao, L., Wang, A., Sun, W., Yan, Q., and Lin, W. Fast-vqa: Efficient end-to-end video quality assessment with fragment sampling. InComputer Vision–ECCV 2022(2022), Springer, pp. 538–554

    2022

  16. [24]

    IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence(2023)

    Wu, H., Chen, C., Liao, L., Hou, J., Sun, W., Y an, Q., Gu, J., and Lin, W.Neighbour- hood representative sampling for efficient end-to-end video quality assessment. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence(2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision(2023), pp

    Wu, H., Zhang, E., Liao, L., Chen, C., Hou, J., W ang, A., Sun, W., Y an, Q., and Lin, W.Exploring video quality assessment on user generated contents from aesthetic and technical perspectives. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision(2023), pp...

    2023

  18. [26]

    B., and Y ao, A.Enhancing video super-resolution via implicit resampling-based alignment

    Xu, K., Yu, Z., W ang, X., Mi, M. B., and Y ao, A.Enhancing video super-resolution via implicit resampling-based alignment. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition(2024), pp. 2546–2555

    2024

  19. [27]

    Yang, J., Shen, S., Yue, H., and Li, K.Implicit transformer network for screen content image continuous super-resolution.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34(2021), 13304–13315

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.