<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Deep Burst Super-Resolution · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2101.10997/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2101.10997/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Deep Burst Super-Resolution — mentioned by favyen</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37412262</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2101.10997:37412262</guid><pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2023 22:26:37 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes, I think this is part of it -- when the model sees a new low-res image, it compares it to patterns that it has already seen to estimate what that location might look like at high-res. The other important part is that the model inputs many low-res images (up to 18, i.e. about three months of images) to produce each high-res image. If you were to down-sample an image by 2x via averaging, then offset the image by one pixel to the right and down-sample it, then repeat for two more offsets, then across the four down-sampled images, you should have enough information to reconstruct the original…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2101.10997/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item></channel></rss>
