Cited by 2,116Image and Signal Denoising MethodsAdvanced Image Processing TechniquesAdvanced Image Fusion Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 81 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 26 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Learning Deep CNN Denoiser Prior for Image Restoration

Open access
Zhang, Kai, Zuo, Wangmeng, Gu, Shuhang, Zhang, Lei·2017·2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

Model-based optimization methods and discriminative learning methods have been the two dominant strategies for solving various inverse problems in low-level vision. Typically, those two kinds of methods have their respective merits and drawbacks, e.g., model-based optimization methods are flexible for handling different inverse problems but are usually time-consuming with sophisticated priors for the purpose of good performance, in the meanwhile, discriminative learning methods have fast testing speed but their application range is greatly restricted by the specialized task. Recent works have revealed that, with the aid of variable splitting techniques, denoiser prior can be plugged in as a modular part of model-based optimization methods to solve other inverse problems (e.g., deblurring). Such an integration induces considerable advantage when the denoiser is obtained via discriminative learning. However, the study of integration with fast discriminative denoiser prior is still lacking. To this end, this paper aims to train a set of fast and effective CNN (convolutional neural network) denoisers and integrate them into model-based optimization method to solve other inverse problems. Experimental results demonstrate that the learned set of denoisers can not only achieve promising Gaussian denoising results but also can be used as prior to deliver good performance for various low-level vision applications.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

The paper trains a set of fast CNN Gaussian denoisers and uses them as modular priors inside a half-quadratic splitting optimization framework to solve image deblurring and super-resolution. Experiments show competitive denoising accuracy and flexible restoration performance across tasks without task-specific retraining.

Key findings

  • The proposed CNN denoiser improves gray-image denoising on BSD68 over BM3D, WNNM, TNRD, and MLP: at σ=15 it reaches 31.63 dB, at σ=25 it reaches 29.15 dB, and at σ=50 it reaches 26.19 dB.
  • For color denoising on BSD68, the proposed denoiser consistently beats CBM3D, e.g. 40.36 vs. 40.24 dB at noise level 5, 31.16 vs. 30.71 dB at 25, and 27.86 vs. 27.38 dB at 50.
  • The learned denoisers can be inserted into a model-based optimization method to handle deblurring and single-image super-resolution; for example, on the Leaves deblurring case with Gaussian blur σ=1.6 and noise level 2, the proposed method reports 29.78 dB versus 26.95 dB for IDDBM3D and 27.50 dB for NCSR.
  • Runtime is competitive: for a 256×256 image with noise level 25, the 24-feature-map version takes 0.10 s on CPU and 0.006 s on GPU, while BM3D takes 0.66 s on CPU and TNRD takes 0.47 s on CPU / 0.010 s on GPU.

Methods

  • The authors design a seven-layer CNN denoiser using dilated convolutions with dilation factors 1, 2, 3, 4, 3, 2, 1; middle layers use 64 feature maps, and the effective receptive field is 33×33.
  • Training uses 400 BSD images, 400 ImageNet validation images, and 4,744 Waterloo Exploration Database images, cropped into 35×35 patches with N = 256×4,000 patches; Adam is used with residual learning and batch normalization.
  • A set of 25 denoisers is trained for gray images and 25 for color images over noise levels from 0 to 50 in steps of 2; these denoisers are integrated into a half-quadratic splitting scheme, where the regularization subproblem becomes a Gaussian denoising step.

Limitations

  • The paper states that future work includes reducing the number of CNN denoisers and iterations, extending the framework to inpainting and blind deblurring, and using multiple complementary priors.
  • The experimental evaluation is limited to denoising, non-blind deblurring, and super-resolution; inpainting and blind deblurring are not tested.
  • The authors note that comparisons with SRCNN and VDSR for non-bicubic super-resolution are unfair because those methods were trained for bicubic degradation, which is evident from the reported setup rather than presented as a limitation of the proposed method.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2017.300

Cites

74 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 1 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

2 of 26 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 1 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 47 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 13
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 10
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
23 of 23
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The study of integration with fast discriminative denoiser prior is still lacking.

    “However, the study of integration with fast discriminative denoiser prior is still lacking.”
    “However, to the best of our knowledge, the study of integration with discriminative denoiser is still lacking.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The convolution is carried out with circular boundary conditions.

    “In addition, we assume the convolution is carried out with circular boundary conditions.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The low-resolution image can be modeled by a blurring and subsequent down-sampling operation on a high-resolution one.

    “In general, the low-resolution (LR) image can be modeled by a blurring and subsequent down-sampling operation on a high-resolution one.”
3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 81 references

6 of the 81 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. foi, 2006, Pointwise shape adaptive DCT denoising with structure preservation in luminance-chrominance space, International Workshop on Video Processing and Quality Metrics for Consumer Electronics
  2. danielyan, 2010, Image deblurring by augmented lagrangian with BM3D frame prior, Workshop on Information Theoretic Methods in Science and Engineering, 16

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 1,601–1,700 of 2,094

Metadata

Authors
Zhang, K., Zuo, W., Gu, S., & Zhang, L.
Affiliations
  • Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK)
  • Harbin Institute of Technology (CN)
Venue
2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2017-07
Pages
2808-2817
OpenAlex
W2613155248
Cited by
2,116
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 80 · 2025: 191 · 2024: 248 · 2023: 293 · 2022: 272 · 2021: 338 · 2020: 297 · 2019: 240 · 2018: 135 · 2017: 10
FWCI
49.67
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • PolyU Institutional Research Archive (Hong Kong Polytechnic University) (submittedVersion)
  • TUScholarShare (Temple University) (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 › Advanced Image Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Advanced Image Fusion Techniques
Keywords
image restoration, model-based optimization, discriminative learning, variable splitting, inverse problems, low-level vision, Gaussian denoising, image deblurring

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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