Cited by 406Image and Video Quality AssessmentDigital Media Forensic DetectionImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques

From Patches to Pictures (PaQ-2-PiQ): Mapping the Perceptual Space of Picture Quality

Open access
Ying, Zhenqiang, Niu, Haoran, Gupta, Praful, Mahajan, Dhruv, Ghadiyaram, Deepti, Bovik, Alan·2020·2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

Blind or no-reference (NR) perceptual picture quality prediction is a difficult, unsolved problem of great consequence to the social and streaming media industries that impacts billions of viewers daily. Unfortunately, popular NR prediction models perform poorly on real-world distorted pictures. To advance progress on this problem, we introduce the largest (by far) subjective picture quality database, containing about 40, 000 real-world distorted pictures and 120, 000 patches, on which we collected about 4M human judgments of picture quality. Using these picture and patch quality labels, we built deep region-based architectures that learn to produce state-of-the-art global picture quality predictions as well as useful local picture quality maps. Our innovations include picture quality prediction architectures that produce global-to-local inferences as well as local-to-global inferences (via feedback). The dataset and source code are available at https: //live.ece.utexas.edu/research.php.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00363

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The most probable reason for PaQ-2-PiQ and KonCept512's poor performance is that they were trained on picture quality datasets which contain different types of (strictly spatial) distortions than UGC-VQA databases.

    “The most probable reason would be that these models were trained on picture quality datasets [64], [70], which contain different types of (strictly spatial) distortions than UGC-VQA databases.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 63 · Cited by 406

Authors
Ying, Z., Niu, H., Gupta, P., Mahajan, D., Ghadiyaram, D., & Bovik, A.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • Meta (United Kingdom) (GB)
Venue
2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2020-06
Pages
3572-3582
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3035712445
Cited by
406
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 99 · 2023: 73 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 8
FWCI
12.11
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Video Quality Assessment
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Keywords
no-reference image quality assessment, perceptual image quality, subjective quality database, image patches, quality map

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