Cited by 1,325Image and Signal Denoising MethodsImage Enhancement TechniquesAdvanced Image Processing Techniques

Image denoising: Can plain neural networks compete with BM3D?

Burger, H. C., Schuler, C. J., Harmeling, S.·2012·2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Abstract

Image denoising can be described as the problem of mapping from a noisy image to a noise-free image. The best currently available denoising methods approximate this mapping with cleverly engineered algorithms. In this work we attempt to learn this mapping directly with a plain multi layer perceptron (MLP) applied to image patches. While this has been done before, we will show that by training on large image databases we are able to compete with the current state-of-the-art image denoising methods. Furthermore, our approach is easily adapted to less extensively studied types of noise (by merely exchanging the training data), for which we achieve excellent results as well.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2012.6247952

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Real-life dirt results showed that the proposed system removed most dirt noise while the MLP left many more unremoved.

    “Real-life dirt results showed that the proposed system removed most dirt noise in the images, while the MLP left many more unremoved.”
  • Synthesized rain results showed that the proposed system outperformed the MLP system in removing more rain droplets and maintaining non-rain areas intact.

    “Synthesized rain that the proposed system outperformed the MLP system, in terms of removing more rain droplets and maintain non-rain areas of the image intact.”
  • Synthetic dirt results showed that the proposed system and the MLP system outperformed the other three baseline methods.

    “Synthetic dirt results showed that the proposed system and the MLP system outperformed the other three baseline methods.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Burger, H. C., Schuler, C. J., & Harmeling, S.
Affiliations
Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems (DE)
Venue
2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2012-06
Pages
2392-2399
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2037642501
Cited by
1,325
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 70 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 94 · 2022: 125 · 2021: 147 · 2020: 184 · 2019: 196 · 2018: 161 · 2017: 105 · 2016: 79 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 1
FWCI
15.61
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Signal Denoising Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Enhancement Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image Processing Techniques
Keywords
image denoising, BM3D, multilayer perceptron, image patches, noise modeling, deep learning denoising

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review