
pmid: 17076403
Measurement of visual quality is of fundamental importance for numerous image and video processing applications, where the goal of quality assessment (QA) algorithms is to automatically assess the quality of images or videos in agreement with human quality judgments. Over the years, many researchers have taken different approaches to the problem and have contributed significant research in this area and claim to have made progress in their respective domains. It is important to evaluate the performance of these algorithms in a comparative setting and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of these methods. In this paper, we present results of an extensive subjective quality assessment study in which a total of 779 distorted images were evaluated by about two dozen human subjects. The "ground truth" image quality data obtained from about 25,000 individual human quality judgments is used to evaluate the performance of several prominent full-reference image quality assessment algorithms. To the best of our knowledge, apart from video quality studies conducted by the Video Quality Experts Group, the study presented in this paper is the largest subjective image quality study in the literature in terms of number of images, distortion types, and number of human judgments per image. Moreover, we have made the data from the study freely available to the research community. This would allow other researchers to easily report comparative results in the future.
Quality Control, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Software Validation, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Information Storage and Retrieval, Image Enhancement, Algorithms, Software
Quality Control, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Software Validation, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Information Storage and Retrieval, Image Enhancement, Algorithms, Software
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2K | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 0.01% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 0.01% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
