2011
DOI: 10.1109/tmm.2011.2152382
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Image Quality Assessment by Separately Evaluating Detail Losses and Additive Impairments

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
135
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 213 publications
(135 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
135
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Among other measures, the fusion measure introduced in [28] also obtained good results, but was worse than rSIM2 (overall weighted). Measures trained on images from a given benchmark tend to perform worse on other benchmarks where some unknown distortion types are introduced, as for, e.g., [46] or [47]. For all examined IQA benchmark datasets, rSIM family of multimeasures showed superior performance: rSIM1 on TID2008; rSIM2 3 , rSIM4 3 , and rSIM4 2 on CSIQ; and rSIM2 3 , rSIM3 2 , and rSIM3 3 on LIVE.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Among other measures, the fusion measure introduced in [28] also obtained good results, but was worse than rSIM2 (overall weighted). Measures trained on images from a given benchmark tend to perform worse on other benchmarks where some unknown distortion types are introduced, as for, e.g., [46] or [47]. For all examined IQA benchmark datasets, rSIM family of multimeasures showed superior performance: rSIM1 on TID2008; rSIM2 3 , rSIM4 3 , and rSIM4 2 on CSIQ; and rSIM2 3 , rSIM3 2 , and rSIM3 3 on LIVE.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Previous attempts in this direction appeared in [37], [38], where point-wise increments and decrements of the gradient magnitude were discriminated. In [39] detail losses and additive impairments were separated using a restored version of the test image as a watershed.…”
Section: B the Proposed Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For s = 1 pixel or slightly more, the frequency response of (1) well approximates the Contrast Sensitivity Function (CSF) of the HVS front end [39], [45], at nominal viewing distance [17]. The operator (1) summarizes the horizontal and vertical filters commonly used for gradient approximation [15] and is steerable, i.e., has the same frequency response for any pattern orientation [46].…”
Section: Detail Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The candidates for 2D metrics are SSIM [50], MS-SSIM [51], ADM [29], ADD-SSIM and ADD-GSIM [15]. The predictive performance of each metric is evaluated by four commonly used performance measures: the Pearson linear correlation coefficient (P LCC), the root mean squared error (RMSE), the Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient (SROCC) and Kendall rank-order correlation coefficient (KROCC).…”
Section: Performance Measurementioning
confidence: 99%