Pith. sign in

REVIEW

KonX: Cross-Resolution Image Quality Assessment

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2212.05813 v1 pith:JH7LDFYK submitted 2022-12-12 cs.CV eess.IV

classification cs.CVeess.IV
keywords imagequalityassessmentcross-resolutionkonxproblemlabellabels
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Scale-invariance is an open problem in many computer vision subfields. For example, object labels should remain constant across scales, yet model predictions diverge in many cases. This problem gets harder for tasks where the ground-truth labels change with the presentation scale. In image quality assessment (IQA), downsampling attenuates impairments, e.g., blurs or compression artifacts, which can positively affect the impression evoked in subjective studies. To accurately predict perceptual image quality, cross-resolution IQA methods must therefore account for resolution-dependent errors induced by model inadequacies as well as for the perceptual label shifts in the ground truth. We present the first study of its kind that disentangles and examines the two issues separately via KonX, a novel, carefully crafted cross-resolution IQA database. This paper contributes the following: 1. Through KonX, we provide empirical evidence of label shifts caused by changes in the presentation resolution. 2. We show that objective IQA methods have a scale bias, which reduces their predictive performance. 3. We propose a multi-scale and multi-column DNN architecture that improves performance over previous state-of-the-art IQA models for this task, including recent transformers. We thus both raise and address a novel research problem in image quality assessment.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools