mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Deep Shape-Texture Statistics for Completely Blind Image Quality Evaluation

arXiv 2401.08107 ↗First posted 16 Jan 2024cs.CV cs.MMcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Opinion-Unaware Blind Image Quality Assessment (OU-BIQA) models aim to predict image quality without training on reference images and subjective quality scores. Thereinto, image statistical comparison is a classic paradigm, while the performance is limited by the representation ability of visual descriptors. Deep features as visual descriptors have advanced IQA in recent research, but they are discovered to be highly texture-biased and lack of shape-bias. On this basis, we find out that image shape and texture cues respond differently towards distortions, and the absence of either one results in an incomplete image representation. Therefore, to formulate a well-round statistical description for images, we utilize the shapebiased and texture-biased deep features produced by Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) simultaneously. More specifically, we design a Shape-Texture Adaptive Fusion (STAF) module to merge shape and texture information, based on which we formulate qualityrelevant image statistics. The perceptual quality is quantified by the variant Mahalanobis Distance between the inner and outer Shape-Texture Statistics (DSTS), wherein the inner and outer statistics respectively describe the quality fingerprints of the distorted image and natural images. The proposed DSTS delicately utilizes shape-texture statistical relations between different data scales in the deep domain, and achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) quality prediction performance on images with artificial and authentic distortions.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 36 of its 101 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jan 2024.

Builds on

36 of 101 references.

References · 36

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,267
  3. 2018The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metriccited by 11,029
  4. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,441
  5. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
  6. 2019EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 6,415
  7. 2014Deep Learning Face Attributes in the Wildcited by 3,679
  8. 2018ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustnesscited by 1,430
  9. 2021MUSIQ: Multi-scale Image Quality Transformercited by 1,058
  10. 2022Exploring CLIP for Assessing the Look and Feel of Imagescited by 974
  11. 2022MANIQA: Multi-dimension Attention Network for No-Reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 514
  12. 2021Intriguing Properties of Vision Transformerscited by 446
24 more
  1. 2019KonIQ-10k: An ecologically valid database for deep learning of blind image quality assessmentcited by 351
  2. 2019SinGAN: Learning a Generative Model from a Single Natural Imagecited by 348
  3. 2023Blind Image Quality Assessment via Vision-Language Correspondence: A Multitask Learning Perspectivecited by 276
  4. 2019From Patches to Pictures (PaQ-2-PiQ): Mapping the Perceptual Space of Picture Qualitycited by 221
  5. 2015Massive Online Crowdsourced Study of Subjective and Objective Picture Qualitycited by 208
  6. 2020PIPAL: a Large-Scale Image Quality Assessment Dataset for Perceptual Image Restorationcited by 177
  7. 2019Style Transfer by Relaxed Optimal Transport and Self-Similaritycited by 167
  8. 2017RankIQA: Learning from Rankings for No-reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 150
  9. 2023AGIQA-3K: An Open Database for AI-Generated Image Quality Assessmentcited by 142
  10. 2020Shape-Texture Debiased Neural Network Trainingcited by 76
  11. 2019dipIQ: Blind Image Quality Assessment by Learning-to-Rank Discriminable Image Pairscited by 73
  12. 2020Informative Dropout for Robust Representation Learning: A Shape-bias Perspectivecited by 57
  13. 2021Shape or Texture: Understanding Discriminative Features in CNNscited by 52
  14. 2020GIQA: Generated Image Quality Assessmentcited by 51
  15. 2020On the Texture Bias for Few-Shot CNN Segmentationcited by 38
  16. 2021Does enhanced shape bias improve neural network robustness to common corruptions?cited by 32
  17. 2021Locally Adaptive Structure and Texture Similarity for Image Quality Assessmentcited by 32
  18. 2017Eigen-Distortions of Hierarchical Representationscited by 25
  19. 2022Going the Extra Mile in Face Image Quality Assessment: A Novel Database and Modelcited by 22
  20. 2021Quantifying Visual Image Quality: A Bayesian Viewcited by 20
  21. 2022DeepWSD: Projecting Degradations in Perceptual Space to Wasserstein Distance in Deep Feature Spacecited by 19
  22. 2023Perceptual Quality Assessment of Face Video Compression: A Benchmark and An Effective Methodcited by 14
  23. 2022DeepDC: Deep Distance Correlation as a Perceptual Image Quality Evaluatorcited by 10
  24. 2014Image Restoration Using Joint Statistical Modeling in Space-Transform Domaincited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 0; 2026: 3.

5 papers.