{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014804845222072678, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.305084745762712, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparative study of different image completion techniques

Image completion is an active and interesting topic in image and video processing. Restoration and retouching of damaged areas in an undetectable form is the objective of image completion techniques. Most of the recently developed video completion methods are based on image completion techniques to restore the damaged frames. With respect to video completion challenges, we compared and evaluated the most recent image completion methods. For a fair comparison, we introduced a new dataset and evaluated four states-of-art- image completion methods on the same hardware. Experimental results are conducted to highlight the strengths and drawbacks of each image completion method.