MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993045660 · doi:10.1109/ic3d.2012.6615146

A human visual system-based 3D video quality metric

2012· preprint· en· W1993045660 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Banitalebi-Dehkordi, Mahsa T. Pourazad, Panos Nasiopoulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetric (unit)Distortion (music)Computer scienceComputer visionQuality (philosophy)Artificial intelligenceHuman visual system modelVideo qualityPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)EngineeringComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although several 2D quality metrics have been proposed for images and videos, in the case of 3D efforts are only at the initial stages. In this paper, we propose a new full-reference quality metric for 3D content. Our method is modeled around the HVS, fusing the information of both left and right channels, considering color components, the cyclopean views of the two videos and disparity. Performance evaluations showed that our 3D quality metric successfully monitors the degradation of quality caused by several representative types of distortion and it has 86% correlation with the results of subjective evaluations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207