Attentive Deep Image Quality Assessment for Omnidirectional Stitching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Omnidirectional images or videos are commonly generated via the stitching of multiple images or videos, and the quality of omnidirectional stitching strongly influences the quality of experience (QoE) of the generated scenes. Although there were many studies research the omnidirectional image quality assessment (IQA), the evaluation of the omnidirectional stitching quality has not been sufficiently explored. In this article, we focus on the IQA for the omnidirectional stitching of dual fisheye images. We first establish an omnidirectional stitching image quality assessment (OSIQA) database, which includes 300 distorted images and 300 corresponding reference images generated from 12 raw scenes. The database contains a variety of distortion types caused by omnidirectional stitching, including color distortion, geometric distortion, blur distortion, and ghosting distortion,etc.A subjective quality assessment study is conducted on the database and human opinion scores are collected for the distorted omnidirectional images. We then devise a deep learning based objective IQA metric termed Attentive Multi-channel IQA Net. In particular, we extend hyper-ResNet by developing a subnetwork for spatial attention and propose a spatial regularization item. Experimental results show that our proposed FR and NR models achieve the best performance compared with the state-of-the-art FR and NR IQA metrics on the OSIQA database. The OSIQA database as well as the proposed Attentive Multi-channel IQA Net will be released to facilitate future research.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".