2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.inffus.2006.09.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A novel similarity based quality metric for image fusion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
143
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 399 publications
(144 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
143
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These metrics include edge retention (Q AB/F ) [53,54], mutual information (MI) [55], visual information fidelity (VIF) [56], Yang proposed fusion metric (Q Y ) [57,58], and Chen-Blum metric (Q CB ) [58,59]. For the fused image, the sizes of Q AB/F , MI, VIF, Q Y , and Q CB become bigger, the corresponding fusion results are better.…”
Section: Objective Evaluation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These metrics include edge retention (Q AB/F ) [53,54], mutual information (MI) [55], visual information fidelity (VIF) [56], Yang proposed fusion metric (Q Y ) [57,58], and Chen-Blum metric (Q CB ) [58,59]. For the fused image, the sizes of Q AB/F , MI, VIF, Q Y , and Q CB become bigger, the corresponding fusion results are better.…”
Section: Objective Evaluation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yang et al proposed structural similarity-Based way for fusion assessment [57]. The Yang's method is shown in Equation (11).…”
Section: Q Ymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dynamic range for Q f is [0,1] and it should be as close to 1 as possible for better fusion. See [8] for the detailed implementation of the aforementioned metric.…”
Section: Fig 5: Multimodal Medical Images Using Different Data Setsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent years, a number of computational image fusion quality assessment metrics have therefore been proposed (e.g. Angell, 2005;Blum, 2006;Chari et al, 2005;Chen & Varshney, 2005;Chen & Varshney, 2007;Corsini et al, 2006;Cvejic et al, 2005a;Cvejic et al, 2005b;Piella & Heijmans, 2003;Toet & Hogervorst, 2003;Tsagiris & Anastassopoulos, 2004;Ulug & Claire, 2000;Wang & Shen, 2006;Xydeas & Petrovic, 2000;Yang et al, 2007;Zheng et al, 2007;Zhu & Jia, 2005). Although some of these metrics agree with human visual perception to some extent, most of them cannot predict observer performance for different input imagery and scenarios.…”
Section: The Need For Image Fusion Quality Metricsmentioning
confidence: 99%