MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011347706 · doi:10.1109/tip.2015.2411436

Utilizing Image Scales Towards Totally Training Free Blind Image Quality Assessment

2015· article· en· W2011347706 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceImage qualityHistogramPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsComputer visionImage (mathematics)Feature detection (computer vision)Image textureRedundancy (engineering)Image histogramImage resolutionImage gradientImage processingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach to blind image quality assessment (BIQA), requiring no training, is proposed in this paper. The approach is named as blind image quality evaluator based on scales and works by evaluating the global difference of the query image analyzed at different scales with the query image at original resolution. The approach is based on the ability of the natural images to exhibit redundant information over various scales. A distorted image is considered as a deviation from the natural image and bereft of the redundancy present in the original image. The similarity of the original resolution image with its down-scaled version will decrease more when the image is distorted more. Therefore, the dissimilarities of an image with its low-resolution versions are cumulated in the proposed method. We dissolve the query image into its scale-space and measure the global dissimilarity with the co-occurrence histograms of the original and its scaled images. These scaled images are the low pass versions of the original image. The dissimilarity, called low pass error, is calculated by comparing the low pass versions across scales with the original image. The high pass versions of the image in different scales are obtained by Wavelet decomposition and their dissimilarity from the original image is also calculated. This dissimilarity, called high pass error, is computed with the variance and gradient histograms and weighted by the contrast sensitivity function to make it perceptually effective. These two kinds of dissimilarities are combined together to derive the quality score of the query image. This method requires absolutely no training with the distorted image, pristine images, or subjective human scores to predict the perceptual quality but uses the intrinsic global change of the query image across scales. The performance of the proposed method is evaluated across six publicly available databases and found to be competitive with the state-of-the-art techniques.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.254 · 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