mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Paired Image-to-Image Translation Quality Assessment Using Multi-Method Fusion

arXiv 2205.04186 ↗First posted 9 May 2022cs.CV eess.IVcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

How best to evaluate synthesized images has been a longstanding problem in image-to-image translation, and to date remains largely unresolved. This paper proposes a novel approach that combines signals of image quality between paired source and transformation to predict the latter's similarity with a hypothetical ground truth. We trained a Multi-Method Fusion (MMF) model via an ensemble of gradient-boosted regressors using Image Quality Assessment (IQA) metrics to predict Deep Image Structure and Texture Similarity (DISTS), enabling models to be ranked without the need for ground truth data. Analysis revealed the task to be feature-constrained, introducing a trade-off at inference between metric computation time and prediction accuracy. The MMF model we present offers an efficient way to automate the evaluation of synthesized images, and by extension the image-to-image translation models that generated them.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 May 2022.

Builds on

7 of 38 references.

References · 7

  1. 2018The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metriccited by 11,177
  2. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
  3. 2016Image-to-Image Translation with Conditional Adversarial Networkscited by 4,527
  4. 2020Image Quality Assessment: Unifying Structure and Texture Similaritycited by 811
  5. 2018Pros and Cons of GAN Evaluation Measurescited by 224
  6. 2018CatBoost: gradient boosting with categorical features supportcited by 208
  7. 2013Gradient Magnitude Similarity Deviation: A Highly Efficient Perceptual Image Quality Indexcited by 195

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.