REVIEW 1 cited by
Approximating Human Judgment of Generated Image Quality
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
read the original abstract
Generative models have made immense progress in recent years, particularly in their ability to generate high quality images. However, that quality has been difficult to evaluate rigorously, with evaluation dominated by heuristic approaches that do not correlate well with human judgment, such as the Inception Score and Fr\'echet Inception Distance. Real human labels have also been used in evaluation, but are inefficient and expensive to collect for each image. Here, we present a novel method to automatically evaluate images based on their quality as perceived by humans. By not only generating image embeddings from Inception network activations and comparing them to the activations for real images, of which other methods perform a variant, but also regressing the activation statistics to match gold standard human labels, we demonstrate 66% accuracy in predicting human scores of image realism, matching the human inter-rater agreement rate. Our approach also generalizes across generative models, suggesting the potential for capturing a model-agnostic measure of image quality. We open source our dataset of human labels for the advancement of research and techniques in this area.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
A Unifying Information-theoretic Perspective on Evaluating Generative Models
A new information-theoretic evaluation metric (PCE, RCE, RE) is proposed to separately detect fidelity loss, mode dropping, and mode shrinkage in generative models, and existing kNN precision/recall metrics are unifie...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.