mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Pairwise Comparisons Are All You Need

arXiv 2403.09746 ↗First posted 13 Mar 2024cs.CVcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Blind image quality assessment (BIQA) approaches, while promising for automating image quality evaluation, often fall short in real-world scenarios due to their reliance on a generic quality standard applied uniformly across diverse images. This one-size-fits-all approach overlooks the crucial perceptual relationship between image content and quality, leading to a 'domain shift' challenge where a single quality metric inadequately represents various content types. Furthermore, BIQA techniques typically overlook the inherent differences in the human visual system among different observers. In response to these challenges, this paper introduces PICNIQ, a pairwise comparison framework designed to bypass the limitations of conventional BIQA by emphasizing relative, rather than absolute, quality assessment. PICNIQ is specifically designed to estimate the preference likelihood of quality between image pairs. By employing psychometric scaling algorithms, PICNIQ transforms pairwise comparisons into just-objectionable-difference (JOD) quality scores, offering a granular and interpretable measure of image quality. The proposed framework implements a deep learning architecture in combination with a specialized loss function, and a training strategy optimized for sparse pairwise comparison settings. We conduct our research using comparison matrices from the PIQ23 dataset, which are published in this paper. Our extensive experimental analysis showcases PICNIQ's broad applicability and competitive performance, highlighting its potential to set new standards in the field of BIQA.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 70 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Mar 2024.

Builds on

32 of 70 references.

References · 32

  1. 2018The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metriccited by 11,029
  2. 2017What Uncertainties Do We Need in Bayesian Deep Learning for Computer Vision?cited by 2,335
  3. 2021MUSIQ: Multi-scale Image Quality Transformercited by 1,058
  4. 2022MANIQA: Multi-dimension Attention Network for No-Reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 514
  5. 2017NIMA: Neural Image Assessmentcited by 387
  6. 2019KonIQ-10k: An ecologically valid database for deep learning of blind image quality assessmentcited by 351
  7. 2019Blind Image Quality Assessment Using A Deep Bilinear Convolutional Neural Networkcited by 301
  8. 2016Deep Neural Networks for No-Reference and Full-Reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 224
  9. 2019From Patches to Pictures (PaQ-2-PiQ): Mapping the Perceptual Space of Picture Qualitycited by 221
  10. 2015Massive Online Crowdsourced Study of Subjective and Objective Picture Qualitycited by 208
  11. 2021No-Reference Image Quality Assessment via Transformers, Relative Ranking, and Self-Consistencycited by 165
  12. 2017RankIQA: Learning from Rankings for No-reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 150
20 more
  1. 2020Uncertainty-Aware Blind Image Quality Assessment in the Laboratory and Wildcited by 134
  2. 2023Diffusion Models for Image Restoration and Enhancement: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 108
  3. 2023Re-IQA: Unsupervised Learning for Image Quality Assessment in the Wildcited by 97
  4. 2020Transformer for Image Quality Assessmentcited by 76
  5. 2019dipIQ: Blind Image Quality Assessment by Learning-to-Rank Discriminable Image Pairscited by 73
  6. 2016Perceptual Quality Prediction on Authentically Distorted Images Using a Bag of Features Approachcited by 71
  7. 2021Blind Quality Assessment for in-the-Wild Images via Hierarchical Feature Fusion and Iterative Mixed Database Trainingcited by 71
  8. 2023Data-Efficient Image Quality Assessment with Attention-Panel Decodercited by 49
  9. 2019Physical Symmetries Embedded in Neural Networkscited by 40
  10. 2017A Probabilistic Quality Representation Approach to Deep Blind Image Quality Predictioncited by 28
  11. 2013Learning to Rank for Blind Image Quality Assessmentcited by 25
  12. 2020Active Fine-Tuning from gMAD Examples Improves Blind Image Quality Assessmentcited by 24
  13. 2021Quantifying Visual Image Quality: A Bayesian Viewcited by 20
  14. 2017A practical guide and software for analysing pairwise comparison experimentscited by 18
  15. 2020Active Sampling for Pairwise Comparisons via Approximate Message Passing and Information Gain Maximizationcited by 17
  16. 2019Learning to Blindly Assess Image Quality in the Laboratory and Wildcited by 14
  17. 2023An Image Quality Assessment Dataset for Portraitscited by 13
  18. 2017HodgeRank with Information Maximization for Crowdsourced Pairwise Ranking Aggregationcited by 4
  19. 2024Generalized Portrait Quality Assessmentcited by 4
  20. 2020A multiple attributes image quality database for smartphone camera photo quality assessmentcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.