mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Content-Diverse Comparisons improve IQA

arXiv 2211.05215 ↗First posted 9 Nov 2022cs.CVcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Image quality assessment (IQA) forms a natural and often straightforward undertaking for humans, yet effective automation of the task remains highly challenging. Recent metrics from the deep learning community commonly compare image pairs during training to improve upon traditional metrics such as PSNR or SSIM. However, current comparisons ignore the fact that image content affects quality assessment as comparisons only occur between images of similar content. This restricts the diversity and number of image pairs that the model is exposed to during training. In this paper, we strive to enrich these comparisons with content diversity. Firstly, we relax comparison constraints, and compare pairs of images with differing content. This increases the variety of available comparisons. Secondly, we introduce listwise comparisons to provide a holistic view to the model. By including differentiable regularizers, derived from correlation coefficients, models can better adjust predicted scores relative to one another. Evaluation on multiple benchmarks, covering a wide range of distortions and image content, shows the effectiveness of our learning scheme for training image quality assessment models.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 62 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Nov 2022.

Builds on

25 of 62 references.

References · 25

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  2. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
  3. 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
  4. 2018The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metriccited by 11,177
  5. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,498
  6. 2016SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restartscited by 5,045
  7. 2016Perceptual Losses for Real-Time Style Transfer and Super-Resolutioncited by 2,694
  8. 2018ESRGAN: Enhanced Super-Resolution Generative Adversarial Networkscited by 1,254
  9. 2020Image Quality Assessment: Unifying Structure and Texture Similaritycited by 811
  10. 2016Deep Neural Networks for No-Reference and Full-Reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 225
  11. 2020Fast Differentiable Sorting and Rankingcited by 197
  12. 2013Gradient Magnitude Similarity Deviation: A Highly Efficient Perceptual Image Quality Indexcited by 195
13 more
  1. 2020PIPAL: a Large-Scale Image Quality Assessment Dataset for Perceptual Image Restorationcited by 178
  2. 2018PieAPP: Perceptual Image-Error Assessment through Pairwise Preferencecited by 160
  3. 2017RankIQA: Learning from Rankings for No-reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 151
  4. 2016Learning a No-Reference Quality Metric for Single-Image Super-Resolutioncited by 144
  5. 2020Uncertainty-Aware Blind Image Quality Assessment in the Laboratory and Wildcited by 134
  6. 2020Smooth-AP: Smoothing the Path Towards Large-Scale Image Retrievalcited by 98
  7. 2020Unified Quality Assessment of In-the-Wild Videos with Mixed Datasets Trainingcited by 72
  8. 2020Norm-in-Norm Loss with Faster Convergence and Better Performance for Image Quality Assessmentcited by 54
  9. 2021Perceptual Image Quality Assessment with Transformerscited by 54
  10. 2019SoDeep: a Sorting Deep net to learn ranking loss surrogatescited by 28
  11. 2020An Unsupervised Information-Theoretic Perceptual Quality Metriccited by 28
  12. 2021NTIRE 2021 Challenge on Perceptual Image Quality Assessmentcited by 18
  13. 2015Geodesics of learned representationscited by 14

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2.

2 papers.