> I *downsized it to 170x170 pixels* and applied a gaussian blur, so that all the detail is GONE
Continue to read through paragraphs 4 and 5 of the "Conclusion" section.
The input to the algorithm will be an image with a power spectrum that isn't natural, . It would be very natural even without "AI" to attempt to "deblur" when faced with such a power spectrum.
A deblur of noise can cause "hallucinations" with much simpler reasons than AI beong involved.
Could it not e.g. be doing some wavelet transforms or FFTs and automatic power spectrum calibration?
Looking at the images, it will be fantastical if not a violation of information theory if the phone didn’t use prior information about how the moon looks to create the photo.
Source: spent way more months than I would have preferred calculating CRLB values on Gaussian blurred point source images.
The information is absolutely not gone.
Does it state that it hallucinates craters that were not there in the original, or is it possible the filters simply did an FFT, adjusted the power spectrum to what we expect of a non-blurry picture, hence inverting the Gaussian blur?
EDIT: Note that a deblur of a smooth but "noisy" image can cause "simulation" or "hallucination" entirely without AI. Could be any number of things causing an output image like that (wavelet sharpening, power spectrum calibration, ...). Even if the information isn't recoverable as such, a photo of a Gaussian blur has an unnatural power spectrum that could easily "trick" conventional non-AI algorithms into doing such things.
Especially since the only thing I see in the output is "more detail" (i.e. simply a different power spectrum than the author expected..)