mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Coupling Model-Driven and Data-Driven Methods for Remote Sensing Image Restoration and Fusion

arXiv 2108.06073 ↗First posted 13 Aug 2021eess.IV cs.CVcited by 11

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In the fields of image restoration and image fusion, model-driven methods and data-driven methods are the two representative frameworks. However, both approaches have their respective advantages and disadvantages. The model-driven methods consider the imaging mechanism, which is deterministic and theoretically reasonable; however, they cannot easily model complicated nonlinear problems. The data-driven methods have a stronger prior knowledge learning capability for huge data, especially for nonlinear statistical features; however, the interpretability of the networks is poor, and they are over-dependent on training data. In this paper, we systematically investigate the coupling of model-driven and data-driven methods, which has rarely been considered in the remote sensing image restoration and fusion communities. We are the first to summarize the coupling approaches into the following three categories: 1) data-driven and model-driven cascading methods; 2) variational models with embedded learning; and 3) model-constrained network learning methods. The typical existing and potential coupling methods for remote sensing image restoration and fusion are introduced with application examples. This paper also gives some new insights into the potential future directions, in terms of both methods and applications.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 70 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Aug 2021.

Builds on

24 of 70 references.

References · 24

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,604
  3. 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,691
  4. 2014Learning Phrase Representations using RNN Encoder-Decoder for Statistical Machine Translationcited by 4,016
  5. 2019A Comprehensive Survey on Graph Neural Networkscited by 2,906
  6. 2017Deep Image Priorcited by 1,097
  7. 2017FFDNet: Toward a Fast and Flexible Solution for CNN based Image Denoisingcited by 509
  8. 2017Learning Deep CNN Denoiser Prior for Image Restorationcited by 407
  9. 2019Variational Denoising Network: Toward Blind Noise Modeling and Removalcited by 117
  10. 2019Deep Plug-and-Play Super-Resolution for Arbitrary Blur Kernelscited by 112
  11. 2020Cross-Scale Internal Graph Neural Network for Image Super-Resolutioncited by 94
  12. 2018Denoising Prior Driven Deep Neural Network for Image Restorationcited by 80
12 more
  1. 2020Total Deep Variation for Linear Inverse Problemscited by 53
  2. 2019Deep Hyperspectral Prior: Denoising, Inpainting, Super-Resolutioncited by 36
  3. 2019Multispectral and Hyperspectral Image Fusion by MS/HS Fusion Netcited by 35
  4. 2019Deep Graph-Convolutional Image Denoisingcited by 32
  5. 2019Multi-scale Dynamic Graph Convolutional Network for Hyperspectral Image Classificationcited by 31
  6. 2020Speckle2Void: Deep Self-Supervised SAR Despeckling with Blind-Spot Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 28
  7. 2017Boosting the accuracy of multi-spectral image pan-sharpening by learning a deep residual networkcited by 23
  8. 2018Improving Shape Deformation in Unsupervised Image-to-Image Translationcited by 19
  9. 2018End-to-end Learning of a Convolutional Neural Network via Deep Tensor Decompositioncited by 6
  10. 2018Spatial-Spectral Fusion by Combining Deep Learning and Variation Modelcited by 6
  11. 2016R-FUSE: Robust Fast Fusion of Multi-Band Images Based on Solving a Sylvester Equationcited by 4
  12. 2020Rank-One Network: An Effective Framework for Image Restorationcited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 4; 2025: 1; 2026: 4.

11 papers.