MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322730980 · doi:10.1109/jstsp.2023.3250956

Attentive Deep Image Quality Assessment for Omnidirectional Stitching

2023· article· en· W4322730980 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsImage stitchingComputer visionArtificial intelligenceOmnidirectional antennaComputer scienceImage qualityQuality (philosophy)Quality assessmentFeature extractionImage (mathematics)Evaluation methodsTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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, <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">etc.</i> 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.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.329 · 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