Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

how did you get GraphAgg* #14

Open
qiqiing opened this issue Jun 22, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

how did you get GraphAgg* #14

qiqiing opened this issue Jun 22, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@qiqiing
Copy link

qiqiing commented Jun 22, 2021

When you are proving ‘Effectiveness of Graph Aggregation Module’, how did you get GraphAgg*. I processed it like this: directly compare the input low-resolution image and its down-sampling form in the image domain to obtain idx_k, and then aggregate to obtain z_sr (using the GraphAggregation in your code) ). What is wrong with this approach? The PSNR of my aggregation result is lower than the result obtained by directly performing ‘bicubic’.

@sczhou
Copy link
Owner

sczhou commented Jun 22, 2021

Hi,
Compared with the image domain, vgg feature domain is still more robust for patching matching in GraphAgg*. In addition, the non-learning version GraphAgg* is heavily affected by the degree of patch recurrence in the input image. You could try to obtain idx_k in the feature domain and test on an image that contains some cross-scale recurrent patches.

@qiqiing
Copy link
Author

qiqiing commented Jun 22, 2021

Hi,
Compared with the image domain, vgg feature domain is still more robust for patching matching in GraphAgg*. In addition, the non-learning version GraphAgg* is heavily affected by the degree of patch recurrence in the input image. You could try to obtain idx_k in the feature domain and test on an image that contains some cross-scale recurrent patches.

Thank you, what you mean is to first input the input image and its down-sampled version into the pre-trained VGG19, look for idx_k in the feature domain, and then aggregate the image domain images according to the found idx_k (the original input and its low-resolution version ), is that correct?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants