Omnidirectional Image Quality Captioning: A Large-Scale Database and a New Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fast growing application of omnidirectional images calls for effective approaches for omnidirectional image quality assessment (OIQA). Existing OIQA methods have been developed and tested on homogeneously distorted omnidirectional images, but it is hard to transfer their success directly to the heterogeneously distorted omnidirectional images. In this paper, we conduct the largest study so far on OIQA, where we establish a large-scale database called OIQ-10K containing 10,000 omnidirectional images with both homogeneous and heterogeneous distortions. A comprehensive psychophysical study is elaborated to collect human opinions for each omnidirectional image, together with the spatial distributions (within local regions or globally) of distortions, and the head and eye movements of the subjects. Furthermore, we propose a novel multitask-derived adaptive feature-tailoring OIQA model named IQCaption360, which is capable of generating a quality caption for an omnidirectional image in a manner of textual template. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of IQCaption360, which outperforms state-of-the-art methods by a significant margin on the proposed OIQ-10K database. The OIQ-10K database and the related source codes are available at https://github.com/WenJuing/IQCaption360.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".