High frequency content based framework for perceptual sharpness assessment in natural images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A blind approach to evaluate the perceptual sharpness present in a natural image is proposed. Though the existing literature demonstrates a set of variegated visual cues to detect or evaluate the absence or presence of sharpness, we emphasize in the current work that high frequency content and local standard deviation can form strong features to compute perceived sharpness in any natural image, and can be considered an able alternative for the existing cues. Unsharp areas in a natural image happen to exhibit uniform intensity or lack of sharp changes between regions. Sharp region transitions in an image are caused by the presence of spatial high frequency content. Therefore, in the proposed framework, we hypothesize that using the high frequency content as the principal stimulus, the perceived sharpness can be quantified in an image. Using extensive experiments, the performance of the proposed framework is demonstrated in terms of different filters and varying pooling strategies. The experiments conducted on four publicly available databases demonstrate improved performance of the proposed framework over that of the state-of-the-art techniques for blind evaluation of perceptual degradation resulting due to the presence of blur.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".