PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

Image Super-Resolution via Latent Diffusion: A Sampling-Space Mixture of Experts and Frequency-Augmented Decoder Approach

Feng Luo, Jinxi Xiang, Jun Zhang, Xiao Han, Yang Wei

generative modelsDiffusion ModelImage Super-Resolution
19.50100
Fused
band ≈ ±14 pct pts (from σ = 0.29)
21.40100
Mimo
band ≈ ±19 pct pts (from σ = 0.38)
23.30100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±21 pct pts (from σ = 0.42)

OpenReview ground truth

Rejected

Abstract

The recent use of diffusion prior, enhanced by pre-trained text-image models, has markedly elevated the performance of image super-resolution (SR). To alleviate the huge computational cost required by pixel-based diffusion SR, latent-based methods utilize a feature encoder to transform the image and then implement the SR image generation in a compact latent space. Nevertheless, there are two major issues that limit the performance of latent-based diffusion. First, the compression of latent space usually causes reconstruction distortion. Second, huge computational cost still constrains the parameter scale of the diffusion model. To counteract these issues, we first propose a frequency compensation module that enhances the frequency components from latent space to pixel space. The reconstruction distortion (especially for high-frequency information) can be significantly decreased. Then, we propose to use Sample-Space Mixture of Experts (SS-MoE) to achieve more powerful latent-based SR, which steadily improves the capacity of the model without a significant increase in inference costs. These carefully crafted designs contribute to performance improvements in largely explored 4× blind super-resolution benchmarks and extend to large magnification factors, i.e., 8× image SR benchmarks.

Author context

Most prolific author: 6 submissions (credibility 1.00).

No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).

Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.

Ranking trajectory

Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.

Battle history — 34 comparisons

Ranked above opponent in 38% of matchups.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 34)