The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Learning without Human Scores for Blind Image Quality Assessment
Abstract
General purpose blind image quality assessment (BIQA) has been recently attracting significant attention in the fields of image processing, vision and machine learning. State-of-the-art BIQA methods usually learn to evaluate the image quality by regression from human subjective scores of the training samples. However, these methods need a large number of human scored images for training, and lack an explicit explanation of how the image quality is affected by image local features. An interesting question is then: can we learn for effective BIQA without using human scored images? This paper makes a good effort to answer this question. We partition the distorted images into overlapped patches, and use a percentile pooling strategy to estimate the local quality of each patch. Then a quality-aware clustering (QAC) method is proposed to learn a set of centroids on each quality level. These centroids are then used as a codebook to infer the quality of each patch in a given image, and subsequently a perceptual quality score of the whole image can be obtained. The proposed QAC based BIQA method is simple yet effective. It not only has comparable accuracy to those methods using human scored images in learning, but also has merits such as high linearity to human perception of image quality, real-time implementation and availability of image local quality map.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity
Wang, Z., Bovik, A. C., Sheikh, H. R., & Simoncelli, E. P. (2004) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2003.819861 · Cited by 57,892
No-reference quality assessment using natural scene statistics: JPEG2000
Sheikh, H. R., Bovik, A. C., & Cormack, L. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2005.854492 · Cited by 575
Cited by
A Feature-Enriched Completely Blind Image Quality Evaluator
Zhang, L., Zhang, L., & Bovik, A. C. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2015.2426416 · Cited by 1,311
Self-citationWaterloo Exploration Database: New Challenges for Image Quality Assessment Models
Ma, K., Duanmu, Z., Wu, Q., Wang, Z., Yong, H., Li, H., & Zhang, L. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2016.2631888 · Cited by 789
Self-citationMean opinion score (MOS) revisited: Methods and applications, limitations and alternatives
Streijl, R. C., Winkler, S., & Hands, D. S. (2016) · Multimedia Systems · doi:10.1007/s00530-014-0446-1 · Cited by 506
No-Reference Image Quality Assessment via Transformers, Relative Ranking, and Self-Consistency
Golestaneh, S. A., Dadsetan, S., & Kitani, K. M. (2022) · 2022 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) · doi:10.1109/wacv51458.2022.00404 · Cited by 465
From Patches to Pictures (PaQ-2-PiQ): Mapping the Perceptual Space of Picture Quality
Ying, Z., Niu, H., Gupta, P., Mahajan, D., Ghadiyaram, D., & Bovik, A. (2020) · 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00363 · Cited by 406
Metadata
- Authors
- Xue, W., Zhang, L., & Mou, X.
- Venue
- 2013 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2013-06
- Pages
- 995-1002
- ISSN
- 1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2162915697
- Cited by
- 404
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 20.05
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Learning without Human Scores for Blind Image Quality Assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/cvpr.2013.133
- The paper
- Xue, W., Zhang, L., & Mou, X. (2013). Learning without Human Scores for Blind Image Quality Assessment. 2013 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr.2013.133
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.