Adaptive Hypergraph Convolutional Network for No-Reference 360-degree Image Quality Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In no-reference 360-degree image quality assessment (NR 360IQA), graph convolutional networks (GCNs), which model interactions between viewports through graphs, have achieved impressive performance. However, prevailing GCN-based NR 360IQA methods suffer from three main limitations. First, they only use high-level features of the distorted image to regress the quality score, while the human visual system scores the image based on hierarchical features. Second, they simplify complex high-order interactions between viewports in a pairwise fashion through graphs. Third, in the graph construction, they only consider the spatial location of the viewport, ignoring its content characteristics. Accordingly, to address these issues, we propose an adaptive hypergraph convolutional network for NR 360IQA, denoted as AHGCN. Specifically, we first design a multi-level viewport descriptor for extracting hierarchical representations from viewports. Then, we model interactions between viewports through hypergraphs, where each hyperedge connects two or more viewports. In the hypergraph construction, we build a location-based hyperedge and a content-based hyperedge for each viewport. Experimental results on two public 360IQA databases demonstrate that our proposed approach has a clear advantage over state-of-the-art full-reference and no-reference IQA models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".