MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153697382 · doi:10.1142/s0219691321500247

An FFT-based visual quality metric robust to spatial shift

2021· article· en· W3153697382 on OpenAlexaff
Guang Yi Chen, Adam Krzyżak

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wavelets Multiresolution and Information Processing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetric (unit)Artificial intelligenceImage qualityComputer sciencePixelComputer visionFidelityFast Fourier transformSpatial frequencyImage processingVisualizationPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)AlgorithmOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring image visual quality is extremely important for many image processing tasks. In the past, several metrics have been proposed for measuring image visual quality such as structural similarity index (SSIM) and visual information fidelity (VIF). Nevertheless, these metrics are not robust to image spatial shifts when the reference and distorted images are misaligned by a few pixels. These metrics generate extremely low metric scores which is undesirable. It is well known that shifting the image by a few pixels does not affect the perceived image quality significantly. In this paper, we modify the SSIM metric to make it more robust to spatial shifts by pre-processing the input images with two-dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier Transform (FFT2). We then use the magnitudes of the Fourier coefficients in the existing metrics since these coefficients are shift-invariant. Experiments show that our proposed novel method is particularly good at measuring the visual quality of 2D images because it is far less complex than the existing methods and it offers better accuracy. Our new method is better than SSIM even when no spatial shifts are introduced to the images.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Wavelets Multiresolution and Information ProcessingSame topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207