Subjective Visual Quality Assessment for High-Fidelity Learning-Based Image Compression
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Learning-based image compression methods have recently emerged as promising alternatives to traditional codecs, offering improved rate-distortion performance and perceptual quality. JPEG AI represents the latest standardized framework in this domain, leveraging deep neural networks for high-fidelity image reconstruction. In this study, we present a comprehensive subjective visual quality assessment of JPEG AI-compressed images using the JPEG AIC-3 methodology, which quantifies perceptual differences in terms of Just Noticeable Difference (JND) units. We generated a dataset of 50 compressed images with fine-grained distortion levels from five diverse sources. A large-scale crowdsourced experiment collected 96,200 triplet responses from 459 participants. We reconstructed JND-based quality scales using a unified model based on boosted and plain triplet comparisons. Additionally, we evaluated the alignment of multiple objective image quality metrics with human perception in the high-fidelity range. The CVVDP metric achieved the overall highest performance; however, most metrics including CVVDP were overly optimistic in predicting the quality of JPEG AI-compressed images. These findings emphasize the necessity for rigorous subjective evaluations in the development and benchmarking of modern image codecs, particularly in the high-fidelity range. Another technical contribution is the introduction of the well-known Meng-Rosenthal-Rubin statistical test to the field of Quality of Experience research. This test can reliably assess the significance of difference in performance of quality metrics in terms of correlation between metrics and ground truth. The complete dataset, including all subjective scores, is publicly available at https://github.com/jpeg-aic/dataset-JPEG-AI-SDR25.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Apr 2025.
Builds on
15 of 43 references.
References · 15
- 2020Learned Image Compression with Discretized Gaussian Mixture Likelihoods and Attention Modulescited by 590
- 2013Gradient Magnitude Similarity Deviation: A Highly Efficient Perceptual Image Quality Indexcited by 195
- 2018Conditional Probability Models for Deep Image Compressioncited by 133
- 2020Learning End-to-End Lossy Image Compression: A Benchmarkcited by 60
- 2018Deep Convolutional AutoEncoder-based Lossy Image Compressioncited by 42
- 2023HDR-VDP-3: A multi-metric for predicting image differences, quality and contrast distortions in high dynamic range and regular contentcited by 41
- 2024ColorVideoVDP: A visual difference predictor for image, video and display distortionscited by 34
- 2017Perceptually Optimized Image Renderingcited by 15
- 2019Perceptual Quality Study on Deep Learning based Image Compressioncited by 4
- 2021Versatile Video Coding Standard: A Review from Coding Tools to Consumers Deploymentcited by 4
- 2023Relaxed forced choice improves performance of visual quality assessment methodscited by 4
- 2022Evaluating the Practicality of Learned Image Compressioncited by 3
3 more
- 2024Bit Rate Matching Algorithm Optimization in JPEG-AI Verification Modelcited by 2
- 2024Fidelity-preserving Learning-Based Image Compression: Loss Function and Subjective Evaluation Methodologycited by 2
- 2024Fine-grained subjective visual quality assessment for high-fidelity compressed imagescited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.