# A Comparative Study of NAFNet Baselines for Image Restoration

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.19845 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.19845/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 7 of its 14 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 Jun 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metric](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1801.03924/) (2018)
- [Squeeze-and-Excitation Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.01507/) (2017)
- [SwinIR: Image Restoration Using Swin Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.10257/) (2021)
- [Restormer: Efficient Transformer for High-Resolution Image Restoration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.09881/) (2021)
- [Group Normalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.08494/) (2018)
- [Multi-Stage Progressive Image Restoration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.02808/) (2021)
- [Simple Baselines for Image Restoration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.04676/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We study NAFNet (Nonlinear Activation Free Network), a simple and efficient deep learning baseline for image restoration. By using CIFAR10 images corrupted with noise and blur, we conduct an ablation study of NAFNet's core components. Our baseline model implements SimpleGate activation, Simplified Channel Activation (SCA), and LayerNormalization. We compare this baseline to different variants that replace or remove components. Quantitative results (PSNR, SSIM) and examples illustrate how each modification affects restoration performance. Our findings support the NAFNet design: the SimpleGate and simplified attention mechanisms yield better results than conventional activations and attention, while LayerNorm proves to be important for stable training. We conclude with recommendations for model design, discuss potential improvements, and future work.