Evidence
We try to catch ourselves lying.
Evidence, not adjectives. Every number below renders from metrics.json and carries its ratification status.
The yardstick
- KID-HP
- Does our fine texture look statistically drawn from real aerial photography? The primary realism gate.
- hf_ratio / hf_frac
- Is there the right amount of fine detail — not too soft, and no fake grain? A floor guards blur; a 1.5× ceiling guards faked texture.
- Radial PSD distance
- Is detail present in the right amounts at every scale?
- LPIPS
- Perceptual distance to a ground truth photographed on a different date — recorded, but demoted from decisions for exactly that reason.
- DISTS
- A second perceptual opinion, more tolerant of texture resampling than LPIPS.
- 2AFC
- Can a human tell ours from real? 0.5 = coin flip = the goal. The actual success criterion.
- Round-trip
- Every output is shrunk back to 10 m and compared with the source pass — the anti-hallucination check.
Current gate table — 2.5 m plane
| Model | KID-HP ↓ | DISTS ↓ | LPIPS ↓ | PSD ↓ | P16 | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bicubic ×4, radiometry-normalized | 18 297 | 0.342 | 0.72 | 1.594 | 0.9 | Control |
| SEAN v5 @ ~21k steps | 4 685 | 0.15 | 0.236 | 0.1 | 1.01 | Proxy |
| SEAN v5 | 3 262 | 0.145 | 0.225 | 0.1 | 1 | Ratified |
| SEAN + high-pass-masked spectral fine-tune λ=100 | 2 878 | 0.146 | 0.224 | 0.122 | 1.01 | Pending sign-off |
| PiSA-SR zero-shot | 7 777 | 0.238 | 0.426 | 0.337 | 0.98 | External |
| OSEDiff zero-shot | 9 302 | 0.243 | 0.465 | 0.425 | 0.98 | External |
| SEN2SRLite | 19 117 | 0.371 | 0.736 | 1.433 | 1.1 | External |
| LDSR-S2 | 19 175 | 0.343 | 0.586 | 1.033 | 1.02 | External |
| DiffFuSR | 22 757 | 0.296 | 0.447 | 0.316 | 0.99 | External |
Real-input arms: LPIPS/PSD are content-confounded (different-date ground truth) — KID-HP and DISTS are the meaningful columns there. The 0.5 m research track uses a different fixture and scale and is deliberately not shown beside these numbers.
Texture realism per version
Against the public frontier (same real inputs)
The credible externals lose by ≥1.7×; the S2-native public models sit at the bicubic floor.
Can you tell which is real?
Twenty pairs. One patch is real aerial photography; one is generated from a Sentinel-2 pass. Founder benchmark (session 1, 2026-07-06): accuracy 0.90 — the goal is 0.50, a coin flip.
1 / 20
Your running accuracy — dashed line = 0.50 goal
no answers yet
Reports
Report PDFs (baseline table, metrology, validity annex) are pending the founder's public-release selection — nothing is published here until that call is made. The numbers above are the same ones those reports pin.
The ones we lost
Corrections & caveats we publish on ourselves (5)
- The LLM judge is UNVALIDATED (repeat-agreement failed both prompt versions) — its numbers are recorded facts, never decision inputs.
- Two historical hf-fraction definitions exist; only the pinned def-A values with a stated tile set are citable.
- The honest bicubic floor is LPIPS ≈ 0.720, not the 0.841 recorded before radiometric normalization.
- A 2026-06-21 claim that real-input output HF was identical to synthetic input was withdrawn — the deficit is ~15% and was masked by rounding.
- Indistinguishability is a goal, not an achievement: the founder still tells our output from real aerial 90% of the time.
- LLM-judge repeat agreement: 0.562 (threshold 0.8) — UNVALIDATED — recorded facts, not decision inputs.