MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157159032 · doi:10.1109/icosp.2008.4697233

Objective image quality measure based on Weber-weighted mean absolute error

2008· article· en· W2157159032 on OpenAlexaff
Salah Ameer, Otman Basir

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPixelWeightingMean squared errorMeasure (data warehouse)SimplicityInverseImage (mathematics)Image qualityAlgorithmComputer scienceMean absolute errorArtificial intelligenceMathematicsQuality (philosophy)Simple (philosophy)Weighted arithmetic meanRange (aeronautics)StatisticsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces three simple image quality measures based on Weber law. After normalizing the original and distorted images, the absolute error between them is found. The final index is a pixel by pixel weighted sum of errors. The maximum between the original image pixel and its negative is the inverse of the weighting factor. Results indicate a better correlation with human perception compared to conventional mean square error MSE. Despite the simplicity of the proposed model, it compares well with other complex schemes in the literature and its complementary outcome is promising in improving those schemes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207