# Image Structure-Induced Semantic Pyramid Network for Inpainting
## 3 Experiment and Analysis
### Quantitative Comparisons
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline  & **Mask** & **CE** & **PEPSI** & **EC** & **PEN-Net** & **CTSDG** & **Ours** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{L1 \(\downarrow\)} & centering & 2.83\% & 2.69\% & 2.44\% & 2.56\% & 2.21\% & 2.19\% \\  & 10\%–20\% & 2.09\% & 1.68\% & 1.57\% & 1.34\% & 1.30\% & 1.21\% \\  & 20\%–30\% & 2.97\% & 2.61\% & 2.55\% & 2.46\% & 2.41\% & 2.31\% \\  & 30\%–40\% & 4.01\% & 3.62\% & 3.24\% & 3.16\% & 3.02\% & 2.83\% \\  & 40\%–50\% & 5.13\% & 4.18\% & 3.95\% & 3.72\% & 3.58\% & 3.37\% \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{PSNR \(\uparrow\)} & centering & 17.22 & 18.69 & 19.27 & 20.51 & 21.09 & 21.13 \\  & 10\%–20\% & 27.98 & 29.16 & 30.47 & 30.58 & 30.69 & 30.96 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 20\%–30\% & 20.46 & 21.79 & 23.18 & 26.19 & 27.11 & 27.61 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 30\%–40\% & 17.65 & 19.24 & 19.86 & 20.57 & 20.95 & 21.09 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 40\%–50\% & 16.20 & 17.19 & 18.21 & 19.34 & 19.40 & 19.47 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{SSIM \(\uparrow\)} & centering & 0.596 & 0.663 & 0.724 & 0.759 & 0.779 & 0.795 \\  & 10\%–20\% & 0.754 & 0.874 & 0.917 & 0.931 & 0.939 & 0.943 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 20\%–30\% & 0.693 & 0.742 & 0.850 & 0.882 & 0.891 & 0.894 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 30\%–40\% & 0.612 & 0.707 & 0.742 & 0.767 & 0.772 & 0.780 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 40\%–50\% & 0.569 & 0.625 & 0.691 & 0.731 & 0.739 & 0.743 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Quantitative comparisons of the inpainting effects on the CelebA-HQ dataset. \(\uparrow\) indicates that higher values are better, while \(\downarrow\) indicates that lower values are better. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline  & **Mask** & **CE** & **PEPSI** & **EC** & **PEN-Net** & **CTSDG** & **Ours** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{L1 \(\downarrow\)} & centering & 3.17\% & 2.91\% & 2.87\% & 2.73\% & 2.83\% & 2.66\% \\  & 10\%–20\% & 2.57\% & 2.06\% & 1.67\% & 1.32\% & 1.02\% & 0.98\% \\  & 20\%–30\% & 2.96\% & 2.84\% & 2.53\% & 2.10\% & 2.05\% & 1.96\% \\  & 30\%–40\% & 3.84\% & 3.22\% & 2.88\% & 2.63\% & 2.42\% & 2.17\% \\  & 40\%–50\% & 4.38\% & 4.06\% & 3.57\% & 3.16\% & 3.11\% & 3.09\% \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{PSNR \(\uparrow\)} & centering & 15.82 & 17.96 & 18.27 & 18.75 & 19.86 & 20.16 \\  & 10\%–20\% & 26.47 & 28.16 & 28.91 & 29.16 & 29.37 & 29.53 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 20\%–30\% & 22.48 & 25.19 & 25.66 & 26.12 & 26.51 & 27.02 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 30\%–40\% & 16.35 & 18.47 & 18.83 & 19.86 & 19.95 & 20.21 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 40\%–50\% & 15.09 & 17.22 & 17.93 & 18.06 & 18.47 & 18.32 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{SSIM \(\uparrow\)} & centering & 0.615 & 0.634 & 0.717 & 0.702 & 0.719 & 0.728 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 10\%–20\% & 0.914 & 0.928 & 0.934 & 0.956 & 0.962 & 0.975 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 20\%–30\% & 0.763 & 0.833 & 0.882 & 0.893 & 0.898 & 0.903 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 30\%–40\% & 0.652 & 0.697 & 0.719 & 0.721 & 0.736 & 0.741 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 40\%–50\% & 0.569 & 0.596 & 0.653 & 0.683 & 0.705 & 0.716 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Quantitative comparisons of the inpainting effects on the Places2 dataset. \(\uparrow\) indicates that higher values are better, while \(\downarrow\) indicates that lower values are better.