From Global to Granular: Revealing IQA Model Performance via Correlation Surface
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluation of Image Quality Assessment (IQA) models has long been dominated by global correlation metrics, such as Pearson Linear Correlation Coefficient (PLCC) and Spearman Rank-Order Correlation Coefficient (SRCC). While widely adopted, these metrics reduce performance to a single scalar, failing to capture how ranking consistency varies across the local quality spectrum. For example, two IQA models may achieve identical SRCC values, yet one ranks high-quality images (related to high Mean Opinion Score, MOS) more reliably, while the other better discriminates image pairs with small quality/MOS differences (related to |DeltaMOS|). Such complementary behaviors are invisible under global metrics. Moreover, SRCC and PLCC are sensitive to test-sample quality distributions, yielding unstable comparisons across test sets. To address these limitations, we propose Granularity-Modulated Correlation (GMC), which provides a structured, fine-grained analysis of IQA performance. GMC includes: (1) a Granularity Modulator that applies Gaussian-weighted correlations conditioned on absolute MOS values and pairwise MOS differences (|DeltaMOS|) to examine local performance variations, and (2) a Distribution Regulator that regularizes correlations to mitigate biases from non-uniform quality distributions. The resulting correlation surface maps correlation values as a joint function of MOS and |DeltaMOS|, providing a 3D representation of IQA performance. Experiments on standard benchmarks show that GMC reveals performance characteristics invisible to scalar metrics, offering a more informative and reliable paradigm for analyzing, comparing, and deploying IQA models. Codes are available at https://github.com/Dniaaa/GMC.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 34 of its 72 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jan 2026.
Builds on
34 of 72 references.
References · 34
- 2018The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metriccited by 11,029
- 2021MUSIQ: Multi-scale Image Quality Transformercited by 1,058
- 2022Exploring CLIP for Assessing the Look and Feel of Imagescited by 974
- 2020Image Quality Assessment: Unifying Structure and Texture Similaritycited by 792
- 2022MANIQA: Multi-dimension Attention Network for No-Reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 514
- 2023Q-Align: Teaching LMMs for Visual Scoring via Discrete Text-Defined Levelscited by 489
- 2019KonIQ-10k: An ecologically valid database for deep learning of blind image quality assessmentcited by 351
- 2019Blind Image Quality Assessment Using A Deep Bilinear Convolutional Neural Networkcited by 301
- 2023Blind Image Quality Assessment via Vision-Language Correspondence: A Multitask Learning Perspectivecited by 276
- 2023Q-Bench: A Benchmark for General-Purpose Foundation Models on Low-level Visioncited by 247
- 2016Deep Neural Networks for No-Reference and Full-Reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 224
- 2023TOPIQ: A Top-down Approach from Semantics to Distortions for Image Quality Assessmentcited by 220
22 more
- 2015Massive Online Crowdsourced Study of Subjective and Objective Picture Qualitycited by 208
- 2013Gradient Magnitude Similarity Deviation: A Highly Efficient Perceptual Image Quality Indexcited by 193
- 2020PIPAL: a Large-Scale Image Quality Assessment Dataset for Perceptual Image Restorationcited by 177
- 2021Delving into Deep Imbalanced Regressioncited by 157
- 2020MetaIQA: Deep Meta-learning for No-Reference Image Quality Assessmentcited by 144
- 2020Uncertainty-Aware Blind Image Quality Assessment in the Laboratory and Wildcited by 134
- 2025VisualQuality-R1: Reasoning-Induced Image Quality Assessment via Reinforcement Learning to Rankcited by 77
- 2020Transformer for Image Quality Assessmentcited by 76
- 2024Adaptive Image Quality Assessment via Teaching Large Multimodal Model to Comparecited by 66
- 2023AIGCIQA2023: A Large-scale Image Quality Assessment Database for AI Generated Images: from the Perspectives of Quality, Authenticity and Correspondencecited by 61
- 2021Perceptual Image Quality Assessment with Transformerscited by 54
- 2020Learning Generalized Spatial-Temporal Deep Feature Representation for No-Reference Video Quality Assessmentcited by 50
- 2024Quality-Aware Image-Text Alignment for Opinion-Unaware Image Quality Assessmentcited by 31
- 2017Eigen-Distortions of Hierarchical Representationscited by 25
- 2022DeepWSD: Projecting Degradations in Perceptual Space to Wasserstein Distance in Deep Feature Spacecited by 19
- 2021Task-Specific Normalization for Continual Learning of Blind Image Quality Modelscited by 18
- 2021No-Reference Image Quality Assessment by Hallucinating Pristine Featurescited by 16
- 2017A Perceptually Weighted Rank Correlation Indicator for Objective Image Quality Assessmentcited by 13
- 2022DeepDC: Deep Distance Correlation as a Perceptual Image Quality Evaluatorcited by 10
- 2024Dog-IQA: Standard-guided Zero-shot MLLM for Mix-grained Image Quality Assessmentcited by 9
- 2024TIER: Text-Image Encoder-based Regression for AIGC Image Quality Assessmentcited by 7
- 2024Mitigating Perception Bias: A Training-Free Approach to Enhance LMM for Image Quality Assessmentcited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.