--- license: other license_name: miic-derived license_link: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIP42928.2021.9506454 task_categories: - image-to-text language: - en tags: - semiconductor - sem - domain-specific-language - program-synthesis - sim-to-real - evaluation pretty_name: MIIC NetDSL Evaluation Set (inputs + model outputs) size_categories: - 1K` / `raw_` | float | `iou`, `dice`, `bf1`, `skel_f1`, `assd`, `hd95`, `x_proj_corr`, `y_proj_corr`, `delta_components`, `delta_endpoints`, `delta_junctions`, `delta_euler`, `lines`, `characters`, `param_tokens`, `unique_params`, `param_digits` | 1035 rows — the 1034 evaluated images plus `test_normal_01035`, whose source file is corrupt (see *Caveats*). ## Headline numbers | Metric | Raw input | **Binary input (ours)** | |---|---|---| | IoU | 0.2865 ± 0.0802 | **0.3619 ± 0.0882** | | Dice | 0.4393 ± 0.0980 | **0.5256 ± 0.0912** | | BF1 @ 2 px | 0.4054 ± 0.1106 | **0.4412 ± 0.1098** | | SkF1 @ 1 px | 0.1276 ± 0.0960 | **0.1746 ± 0.1145** | | ASSD | 4.7768 ± 3.4596 | **4.1327 ± 1.2757** | Recomputable directly from this dataset: ```python import numpy as np from datasets import load_dataset ds = load_dataset("utsubo12/miic-netdsl-eval", split="test") for cond in ("binary", "raw"): v = np.array([x for x in ds[f"{cond}_dice"] if x is not None]) print(cond, "n =", len(v), "Dice =", f"{v.mean():.4f} ± {v.std(ddof=1):.4f}") ``` ## Preprocessing — reproducing the two conditions Both start from the native 512×512 image and **resize before anything else**: ```python from PIL import Image import numpy as np img = Image.open("test_normal_00169.jpg").convert("L").resize((256, 256), Image.LANCZOS) raw_input = img # baseline condition binary_input = Image.fromarray(np.where(np.array(img) > 96, 255, 0).astype(np.uint8), "L") ``` The threshold is **96**, and it is applied to the *resampled* pixels — thresholding the native 512×512 image gives a different result. Verified: this recipe reproduces `image_binary_thr96` with 0 of 65,536 pixels differing. (§III-D of the paper prints "100" and does not mention the resize; the released data, `src/miic_binarize_thr96.py` and both `summary.json` files all use 96 after resize.) ## Raw file bundles For running the repository's scripts unchanged: | Path | Contents | |---|---| | `raw/miic_normal_original.tar.gz` | `normal_img/` — 1035 original JPEGs | | `raw/miic_binary_thr96.tar.gz` | `preprocessed_thr96_normal/` — 1034 binarized PNGs (inputs **and** GT) | | `raw/miic_raw_resized256.tar.gz` | `temp_resized/` — 1034 256×256 resized PNGs | | `raw/outputs_binary_input.tar.gz` | binary condition: `dsl/` (1034), `rendered/` (1005), `results.json`, `summary.json` | | `raw/outputs_raw_input.tar.gz` | raw condition: `dsl/` (1034), `rendered/` (1019), `results.json`, `summary.json` | ```bash hf download utsubo12/miic-netdsl-eval --repo-type dataset --local-dir data/hf_miic mkdir -p data/miic_iad tar xzf data/hf_miic/raw/miic_normal_original.tar.gz -C data/miic_iad tar xzf data/hf_miic/raw/miic_binary_thr96.tar.gz -C data/miic_iad ``` ## Caveats 1. **Sample counts differ between conditions.** The raw run covers all 1034 images (1019 executable, 98.5 %). The binary run crashed and was resumed; the resume restored the processed-names list but not the matching result objects, so its `summary.json` aggregates **986** samples (957 executable — the paper's 97.1 % is 957/986, not 957/1034). Table I is therefore an **unpaired** comparison (binary n=957, raw n=1019, intersection 946). The DSL and renderings for the dropped samples survive (`dsl/` has all 1034, `rendered/` has 1005), so full-set metrics can be recomputed without re-running the model: doing so gives IoU 0.3628 / Dice 0.5265 and executability 1005/1034 = 97.2 %. Rows whose `binary_success` is `null` are the 48 that never reached the aggregate, plus the corrupt `test_normal_01035` described next. 2. **`test_normal_01035` is not a decodable image.** The 1035th source file is corrupt; the preprocessing script skipped it silently, which is why there are 1034 ground-truth images. Its row carries the original file for completeness but has no derived images or metrics. 3. **Generation is stochastic.** Re-running inference will not reproduce these DSL strings token for token. The stable claim is the ordering — binary input beats raw input on the reported metrics. ## License and provenance The images derive from the **MIIC dataset** of Huang et al., *ICIP 2021* ([DOI 10.1109/ICIP42928.2021.9506454](https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIP42928.2021.9506454)) and remain subject to that dataset's terms — please cite it if you use them. Redistributed here for reproducibility of the paper's evaluation. The DSL programs, renderings and metrics are original work of this paper, released under MIT. ```bibtex @inproceedings{ohtsubo2026bridging, author = {Ohtsubo, Yusuke and Dohi, Kota and Yawata, Koichiro and Takeshita, Koki and Sasaki, Tatsuya}, title = {Bridging the Sim-to-Real Gap in Semiconductor Visual Program Synthesis via Input Binarization}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 34th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO)}, year = {2026}, publisher = {EURASIP} } ```