You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
In this paper, we propose a structured image inpainting method employing an energy based model. In order to learn structural relationship between patterns observed in images and missing regions of the images, we employ an energy-based structured prediction method. The structural relationship is learned by minimizing an energy function which is defined by a simple convolutional neural network. The experimental results on various benchmark datasets show that our proposed method significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art methods which use Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs). We obtained 497.35 mean squared error (MSE) on the Olivetti face dataset compared to 833.0 MSE provided by the state-of-the-art method. Moreover, we obtained 28.4 dB peak signal to noise ratio (PSNR) on the SVHN dataset and 23.53 dB on the CelebA dataset, compared to 22.3 dB and 21.3 dB, provided by the state-of-the-art methods, respectively. The code is publicly available.11https:llgithub.com cvlab-tohoku DSEBImageInpainting.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: 

[2]: Recent work has shown that convolutional networks can be substantially deeper, more accurate, and efficient to train if they contain shorter connections between layers close to the input and those close to the output. In this paper, we embrace this observation and introduce the Dense Convolutional Network (DenseNet), which connects each layer to every other layer in a feed-forward fashion. Whereas traditional convolutional networks with L layers have L connections&#x2014;one between each layer and its subsequent layer&#x2014;our network has L(L+1) 2 direct connections. For each layer, the feature-maps of all preceding layers are used as inputs, and its own feature-maps are used as inputs into all subsequent layers. DenseNets have several compelling advantages: they alleviate the vanishing-gradient problem, strengthen feature propagation, encourage feature reuse, and substantially reduce the number of parameters. We evaluate our proposed architecture on four highly competitive object recognition benchmark tasks (CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, SVHN, and ImageNet). DenseNets obtain significant improvements over the state-of-the-art on most of them, whilst requiring less memory and computation to achieve high performance. Code and pre-trained models are available at https: github.com liuzhuang13 DenseNet.

[3]: Deeper neural networks are more difficult to train. We present a residual learning framework to ease the training of networks that are substantially deeper than those used previously. We explicitly reformulate the layers as learning residual functions with reference to the layer inputs, instead of learning unreferenced functions. We provide comprehensive empirical evidence showing that these residual networks are easier to optimize, and can gain accuracy from considerably increased depth. On the ImageNet dataset we evaluate residual nets with a depth of up to 152 layers—8× deeper than VGG nets [40] but still having lower complexity. An ensemble of these residual nets achieves 3.57 error on the ImageNet test set. This result won the 1st place on the ILSVRC 2015 classification task. We also present analysis on CIFAR-10 with 100 and 1000 layers. The depth of representations is of central importance for many visual recognition tasks. Solely due to our extremely deep representations, we obtain a 28 relative improvement on the COCO object detection dataset. Deep residual nets are foundations of our submissions to ILSVRC & COCO 2015 competitions1, where we also won the 1st places on the tasks of ImageNet detection, ImageNet localization, COCO detection, and COCO segmentation.
[1] proposed input convex neural networks (ICNNs) which share similar architectural properties compared to SPENs. ICNNs add constraints to the parameters of SPENs, such that their energy function is convex with respect to some parameters of the energy function and the optimization can be performed globally. Our architecture is similar to that of SPENs and ICNNs. Unlike SPENs, which only consider multi-label classification problems, we address image inpainting problems. Employment of end-to-end learning methods enables SPENs to handle more complex tasks such as depth image denoising. We employ a specific CNN which includes connections from input layer to hidden layers in order to achieve realistic image inpainting results. Such connections have been recently discussed in deep residual networks [3] and densely connected convolutional networks [2] . ICNNs employ such connections in order to restrict the energy function to be a convex function with respect to some parameters of the energy function. However, convexity gives a strong restriction on the expressivity of the energy function. In our experiments, we show that convexity constraints of ICNNs hinder the networks from generating visually better image inpainting results, and thus our method performs better than ICNNs.