# Recursive InPainting (RIP): how much information is lost under recursive inferences?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.09549 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.09549/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 21 of its 42 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 27 Jun 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 21 of 21)

- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metric](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1801.03924/) (2018)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Deep Unsupervised Learning using Nonequilibrium Thermodynamics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1503.03585/) (2015)
- [Zero-Shot Text-to-Image Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.12092/) (2021)
- [Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.04615/) (2022)
- [SqueezeNet: AlexNet-level accuracy with 50x fewer parameters and <0.5MB model size](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.07360/) (2016)
- [Improved Precision and Recall Metric for Assessing Generative Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.06991/) (2019)
- [Generative Adversarial Networks: An Overview](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.07035/) (2017)
- [Reliable Fidelity and Diversity Metrics for Generative Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.09797/) (2020)
- [Large Scale Image Completion via Co-Modulated Generative Adversarial Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.10428/) (2021)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.19736/) (2023)
- [A Tale of Tails: Model Collapse as a Change of Scaling Laws](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.07043/) (2024)
- [On the Stability of Iterative Retraining of Generative Models on their own Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.00429/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Suffer From Their Own Output: An Analysis of the Self-Consuming Training Loop](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.16822/) (2023)
- [Uni-paint: A Unified Framework for Multimodal Image Inpainting with Pretrained Diffusion Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.07222/) (2023)
- [Towards Understanding the Interplay of Generative Artificial Intelligence and the Internet](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.06130/) (2023)
- [Deep Learning-based Image and Video Inpainting: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.03395/) (2024)
- [Heat Death of Generative Models in Closed-Loop Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.02325/) (2024)
- [ID.8: Co-Creating Visual Stories with Generative AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.14228/) (2023)
- [Can Artificial Intelligence Reconstruct Ancient Mosaics?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.06145/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Comparative Analysis of Generative Models: Enhancing Image Synthesis with VAEs, GANs, and Stable Diffusion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08751/) (2024)
- [Emotion Classification of Children Expressions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.07708/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is accelerating content creation and modification. For example, variations of a given content, be it text or images, can be created almost instantly and at a low cost. This will soon lead to the majority of text and images being created directly by AI models or by humans assisted by AI. This poses new risks; for example, AI-generated content may be used to train newer AI models and degrade their performance, or information may be lost in the transformations made by AI which could occur when the same content is processed over and over again by AI tools. An example of AI image modifications is inpainting in which an AI model completes missing fragments of an image. The incorporation of inpainting tools into photo editing programs promotes their adoption and encourages their recursive use to modify images. Inpainting can be applied recursively, starting from an image, removing some parts, applying inpainting to reconstruct the image, revising it, and then starting the inpainting process again on the reconstructed image, etc. This paper presents an empirical evaluation of recursive inpainting when using one of the most widely used image models: Stable Diffusion. The inpainting process is applied by randomly selecting a fragment of the image, reconstructing it, selecting another fragment, and repeating the process a predefined number of iterations. The images used in the experiments are taken from a publicly available art data set and correspond to different styles and historical periods. Additionally, photographs are also evaluated as a reference. The modified images are compared with the original ones by both using quantitative metrics and performing a qualitative analysis. The results show that recursive inpainting in some cases modifies the image so that it still resembles the original one while in others leads to degeneration.