Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

Waterloo Exploration Database: New Challenges for Image Quality Assessment Models

Published: 01 February 2017 Publication History

Abstract

The great content diversity of real-world digital images poses a grand challenge to image quality assessment (IQA) models, which are traditionally designed and validated on a handful of commonly used IQA databases with very limited content variation. To test the generalization capability and to facilitate the wide usage of IQA techniques in real-world applications, we establish a large-scale database named the Waterloo Exploration Database, which in its current state contains 4744 pristine natural images and 94 880 distorted images created from them. Instead of collecting the mean opinion score for each image via subjective testing, which is extremely difficult if not impossible, we present three alternative test criteria to evaluate the performance of IQA models, namely, the pristine/distorted image discriminability test, the listwise ranking consistency test, and the pairwise preference consistency test (P-test). We compare 20 well-known IQA models using the proposed criteria, which not only provide a stronger test in a more challenging testing environment for existing models, but also demonstrate the additional benefits of using the proposed database. For example, in the P-test, even for the best performing no-reference IQA model, more than 6 million failure cases against the model are discovered automatically out of over 1 billion test pairs. Furthermore, we discuss how the new database may be exploited using innovative approaches in the future, to reveal the weaknesses of existing IQA models, to provide insights on how to improve the models, and to shed light on how the next-generation IQA models may be developed. The database and codes are made publicly available at: https://ece.uwaterloo.ca/~k29ma/exploration/ .

References

[1]
Z. Wang and A. C. Bovik, Modern Image Quality Assessment . San Rafael, CA, USA: Morgan Claypool Publishers, 2006.
[2]
Z. Wang and A. C. Bovik, “ Mean squared error: Love it or leave it? A new look at signal fidelity measures,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. Volume 26, no. Issue 1, pp. 98–117, 2009.
[3]
H. R. Sheikh, Z. Wang, A. C. Bovik, and L. K. Cormack Image and Video Quality Assessment Research at LIVE, accessed on 2016. [Online]. Available: http://live.ece.utexas.edu/research/quality/
[4]
N. Ponomarenko et al., “ Image database TID2013: Peculiarities, results and perspectives,” Signal Process., Image Commun., vol. Volume 30, pp. 57–77, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://ponomarenko.info/tid2013.htm
[5]
T. Ho feld et al., “ Best practices for QoE crowdtesting: QoE assessment with crowdsourcing,” IEEE Trans. Multimedia, vol. Volume 16, no. Issue 2, pp. 541–558, 2014.
[6]
S. J. Daly, “ Visible differences predictor: An algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity,” Proc. SPIE, vol. Volume 1666, pp. 2–15, 1992.
[7]
Z. Wang, G. Wu, H. R. Sheikh, E. P. Simoncelli, E.-H. Yang, and A. C. Bovik, “ Quality-aware images,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 15, no. Issue 6, pp. 1680–1689, 2006.
[8]
Z. Wang, A. C. Bovik, H. R. Sheikh, and E. P. Simoncelli, “ Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 13, no. Issue 4, pp. 600–612, 2004.
[9]
H. R. Sheikh and A. C. Bovik, “ Image information and visual quality,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 15, no. Issue 2, pp. 430–444, 2006.
[10]
W. Xue, L. Zhang, X. Mou, and A. C. Bovik, “ Gradient magnitude similarity deviation: A highly efficient perceptual image quality index,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 23, no. Issue 2, pp. 684–695, 2014.
[11]
F. Gao and J. Yu, “ Biologically inspired image quality assessment,” Signal Process., vol. Volume 124, pp. 210–219, 2016.
[12]
P. Ye, J. Kumar, L. Kang, and D. Doermann, “ Unsupervised feature learning framework for no-reference image quality assessment,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit., Jun. 2012, pp. 1098–1105.
[13]
A. K. Moorthy and A. C. Bovik, “ Blind image quality assessment: From natural scene statistics to perceptual quality,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 20, no. Issue 12, pp. 3350–3364, 2011.
[14]
L. Zhang, L. Zhang, and A. C. Bovik, “ A feature-enriched completely blind image quality evaluator,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 24, no. Issue 8, pp. 2579–2591, 2015.
[15]
Q. Wu et al., “ Blind image quality assessment based on multichannel feature fusion and label transfer,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. Volume 26, no. Issue 3, pp. 425–440, 2016.
[16]
F. Gao, D. Tao, X. Gao, and X. Li, “ Learning to rank for blind image quality assessment,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst., vol. Volume 26, no. Issue 10, pp. 2275–2290, 2015.
[17]
N. Ponomarenko and K. Egiazarian (2008). Tampere Image Database TID2008 . [Online]. Available: http://www.ponomarenko.info/tid2008
[18]
E. C. Larson and D. M. Chandler, “ Most apparent distortion: Full-reference image quality assessment and the role of strategy,” J. Electron. Imag., vol. Volume 19, no. Issue 1, p. pp.011006, 2010.
[19]
D. Jayaraman, A. Mittal, A. K. Moorthy, and A. C. Bovik, “ Objective quality assessment of multiply distorted images,” in Proc. IEEE 46th Asilomar Conf. Signals, Syst. Comput., Nov. 2012, pp. 1693–1697.
[20]
D. Ghadiyaram and A. C. Bovik, “ Massive online crowdsourced study of subjective and objective picture quality,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 25, no. Issue 1, pp. 372–387, 2016.
[21]
. (2000). Final Report from the Video Quality Experts Group on the Validation of Objective Models of Video Quality Assessment . [Online]. Available: http://www.vqeg.org
[22]
H. R. Sheikh, M. F. Sabir, and A. C. Bovik, “ A statistical evaluation of recent full reference image quality assessment algorithms,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 15, no. Issue 11, pp. 3440–3451, 2006.
[23]
H. A. David, “ The method of paired comparisons,” DTIC Document, Tech. Rep., 1963, vol. Volume 12 .
[24]
P. L. Callet and F. Autrusseau (2005). Subjective Quality Assessment IRCCyN/IVC Database . [Online]. Available: http://www.irccyn.ec-nantes.fr/ivcdb/
[25]
Y. Horita, K. Shibata, Y. Kawayoke, and Z. M. Parvez (2010). Toyama-MICT Image Quality Evaluation Database . [Online]. Available: http://mict.eng.u-toyama.ac.jp/mictdb
[26]
D. M. Chandler and S. S. Hemami, “ VSNR: A wavelet-based visual signal-to-noise ratio for natural images,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 16, no. Issue 9, pp. 2284–2298, 2007.
[27]
U. Engelke, M. Kusuma, H.-J. Zepernick, and M. Caldera, “ Reduced-reference metric design for objective perceptual quality assessment in wireless imaging,” Signal Process., Image Commun., vol. Volume 24, no. Issue 7, pp. 525–547, 2009.
[28]
S. Winkler. (2016.) Image and Video Quality Resources . [Online]. Available: http://stefan.winkler.net/resources.html/
[29]
S. Winkler, “ Analysis of public image and video databases for quality assessment,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. Volume 6, no. Issue 6, pp. 616–625, 2012.
[30]
N. Ponomarenko, V. Lukin, A. Zelensky, K. Egiazarian, M. Carli, and F. Battisti, “ TID2008 A database for evaluation of full-reference visual quality assessment metrics,” Adv. Modern Radioelectron., vol. Volume 10, no. Issue 4, pp. 30–45, 2009.
[31]
A. K. Moorthy and A. C. Bovik, “ A two-step framework for constructing blind image quality indices,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett., vol. Volume 17, no. Issue 5, pp. 513–516, 2010.
[32]
M. A. Saad, A. C. Bovik, and C. Charrier, “ Blind image quality assessment: A natural scene statistics approach in the DCT domain,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 21, no. Issue 8, pp. 3339–3352, 2012.
[33]
A. Mittal, A. K. Moorthy, and A. C. Bovik, “ No-reference image quality assessment in the spatial domain,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 21, no. Issue 12, pp. 4695–4708, 2012.
[34]
A. Mittal, R. Soundararajan, and A. C. Bovik, “ Making a completely blind image quality analyzer,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett., vol. Volume 20, no. Issue 3, pp. 209–212, 2013.
[35]
W. Xue, L. Zhang, and X. Mou, “ Learning without human scores for blind image quality assessment,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit., Jun. 2013, pp. 995–1002.
[36]
W. Xue, X. Mou, L. Zhang, A. C. Bovik, and X. Feng, “ Blind image quality assessment using joint statistics of gradient magnitude and Laplacian features,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 23, no. Issue 11, pp. 4850–4862, 2014.
[37]
A. Saha and Q. M. J. Wu, “ Utilizing image scales towards totally training free blind image quality assessment,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 24, no. Issue 6, pp. 1879–1892, 2015.
[38]
Q. Wu, Z. Wang, and H. Li, “ A highly efficient method for blind image quality assessment,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Image Process., Sep. 2015, pp. 339–343.
[39]
K. Gu, G. Zhai, X. Yang, and W. Zhang, “ Using free energy principle for blind image quality assessment,” IEEE Trans. Multimedia, vol. Volume 17, no. Issue 1, pp. 50–63, 2015.
[40]
Z. Wang and E. P. Simoncelli, “ Reduced-reference image quality assessment using a wavelet-domain natural image statistic model,” Proc. SPIE, vol. Volume 5666, pp. 149–159, 2005.
[41]
P. Marziliano, F. Dufaux, S. Winkler, and T. Ebrahimi, “ Perceptual blur and ringing metrics: Application to JPEG2000,” Signal Process., Image Commun., vol. Volume 19, no. Issue 2, pp. 163–172, 2004.
[42]
L. Xu, W. Lin, J. Li, X. Wang, Y. Yan, and Y. Fang, “ Rank learning on training set selection and image quality assessment,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Multimedia Expo, Jul. 2014, pp. 1–6.
[43]
Z. Wang, E. P. Simoncelli, and A. C. Bovik, “ Multiscale structural similarity for image quality assessment,” in Proc. 37th Asilomar Conf. Signals, Syst. Comput., vol. Volume 2 . Nov. 2003, pp. 1398–1402.
[44]
L. Zhang, L. Zhang, X. Mou, and D. Zhang, “ FSIM: A feature similarity index for image quality assessment,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 20, no. Issue 8, pp. 2378–2386, 2011.
[45]
R. Soundararajan and A. C. Bovik, “ RRED indices: Reduced reference entropic differencing for image quality assessment,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. Volume 21, no. Issue 2, pp. 517–526, 2012.
[46]
Z. Wang and E. P. Simoncelli, “ Maximum differentiation (MAD) competition: A methodology for comparing computational models of perceptual quantities,” J. Vis., vol. Volume 8, no. Issue 12, p. pp.8, 2008.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)CEPDNet: a fast CNN-based image denoising network using edge computing platformThe Journal of Supercomputing10.1007/s11227-024-06646-081:1Online publication date: 1-Jan-2025
  • (2024)Deep Shape-Texture Statistics for Completely Blind Image Quality EvaluationACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications10.1145/369497720:12(1-21)Online publication date: 20-Sep-2024
  • (2024)A Metric for Evaluating Image Quality Difference Perception Ability in Blind Image Quality Assessment ModelsProceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Quality of Experience in Visual Multimedia Applications10.1145/3689093.3689182(12-20)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
IEEE Transactions on Image Processing  Volume 26, Issue 2
February 2017
545 pages

Publisher

IEEE Press

Publication History

Published: 01 February 2017

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 20 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)CEPDNet: a fast CNN-based image denoising network using edge computing platformThe Journal of Supercomputing10.1007/s11227-024-06646-081:1Online publication date: 1-Jan-2025
  • (2024)Deep Shape-Texture Statistics for Completely Blind Image Quality EvaluationACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications10.1145/369497720:12(1-21)Online publication date: 20-Sep-2024
  • (2024)A Metric for Evaluating Image Quality Difference Perception Ability in Blind Image Quality Assessment ModelsProceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Quality of Experience in Visual Multimedia Applications10.1145/3689093.3689182(12-20)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2024
  • (2024)FlexIR: Towards Flexible and Manipulable Image RestorationProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia10.1145/3664647.3680825(6143-6152)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Harmony in Diversity: Improving All-in-One Image Restoration via Multi-Task CollaborationProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia10.1145/3664647.3680762(6015-6023)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Exploring Data Efficiency in Image Restoration: A Gaussian Denoising Case StudyProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia10.1145/3664647.3680603(2564-2573)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2024
  • (2024)A Systematic Survey of Deep Learning-Based Single-Image Super-ResolutionACM Computing Surveys10.1145/365910056:10(1-40)Online publication date: 13-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Pivotal Auto-Encoder via Self-Normalizing ReLUIEEE Transactions on Signal Processing10.1109/TSP.2024.341897172(3201-3212)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
  • (2024)Deep Variational Network Toward Blind Image RestorationIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence10.1109/TPAMI.2024.336574546:11(7011-7026)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2024
  • (2024)RUN: Rethinking the UNet Architecture for Efficient Image RestorationIEEE Transactions on Multimedia10.1109/TMM.2024.340765626(10381-10394)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media