Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Architecture of the proposed MCSCN model.

Our network consists of three main parts: BFE, MCSCM, and reconstruction module. We introduce a MCSCM to complement the information and make full use of the different scales of feature information.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Architecture of DCU.

It mainly contains encoder and decoder layers, and we can use different kernel sizes to achieve different scales of information.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

PSNR comparison of different kernel sizes for the MCSCM.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 3.

The PSNR and SSIM of the different number of stacked DCUs.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

The visual comparison results magnified by an upscaling factor 4.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 2.

PSNR and SSIM comparison results among different methods.

Boldface indicates the best performance and italics indicate the second-best performance.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

PSNR/SSIM comparison on remote sensing test datasets among different methods with up-scaling factor ×4.

Boldface indicates the best performance and italics indicate the second-best performance.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 5.

The comparative results of Test20 dataset magnified by an up-scaling factor 3.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

The visual comparison of Test20 dataset SR obtained using different methods with an up-scaling factor 4.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Comparison between model complexity and image quality.

The left vertical axis is the number of parameters, and the right vertical axis is the size of the model file.

More »

Fig 7 Expand