The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Perceptual Quality Assessment of Smartphone Photography
Abstract
As smartphones become people's primary cameras to take photos, the quality of their cameras and the associated computational photography modules has become a de facto standard in evaluating and ranking smartphones in the consumer market. We conduct so far the most comprehensive study of perceptual quality assessment of smartphone photography. We introduce the Smartphone Photography Attribute and Quality (SPAQ) database, consisting of 11,125 pictures taken by 66 smartphones, where each image is attached with so far the richest annotations. Specifically, we collect a series of human opinions for each image, including image quality, image attributes (brightness, colorfulness, contrast, noisiness, and sharpness), and scene category labels (animal, cityscape, human, indoor scene, landscape, night scene, plant, still life, and others) in a well-controlled laboratory environment. The exchangeable image file format (EXIF) data for all images are also recorded to aid deeper analysis. We also make the first attempts using the database to train blind image quality assessment (BIQA) models constructed by baseline and multi-task deep neural networks. The results provide useful insights on how EXIF data, image attributes and high-level semantics interact with image quality, how next-generation BIQA models can be designed, and how better computational photography systems can be optimized on mobile devices. The database along with the proposed BIQA models are available at https://github.com/h4nwei/SPAQ.
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
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 · Cited by 235,474
Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition
Simonyan, K., & Zisserman, A. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1409.1556 · Cited by 114,148
ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks
Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Hinton, G. E. (2017) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3065386 · Cited by 112,155
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946
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
Self-citationImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge
Russakovsky, O., Deng, J., Su, H., Krause, J., Satheesh, S., Ma, S., Huang, Z., Karpathy, A., Khosla, A., Bernstein, M., et al. (2015) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-015-0816-y · Cited by 39,380
Making a “Completely Blind” Image Quality Analyzer
Mittal, A., Soundararajan, R., & Bovik, A. C. (2013) · IEEE Signal Processing Letters · doi:10.1109/lsp.2012.2227726 · Cited by 6,766
No-Reference Image Quality Assessment in the Spatial Domain
Mittal, A., Moorthy, A. K., & Bovik, A. C. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2012.2214050 · Cited by 6,064
Image information and visual quality
Sheikh, H. R., & Bovik, A. C. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2005.859378 · Cited by 4,104
Multi-task Learning Using Uncertainty to Weigh Losses for Scene Geometry and Semantics
Cipolla, R., Gal, Y., & Kendall, A. (2018) · 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2018.00781 · Cited by 3,151
Cited by
Exploring CLIP for Assessing the Look and Feel of Images
Wang, J., Chan, K. C. K., & Loy, C. C. (2023) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v37i2.25353 · Cited by 733
Low-Light Image and Video Enhancement Using Deep Learning: A Survey
Li, C., Guo, C., Han, L., Jiang, J., Cheng, M.-M., Gu, J., & Loy, C. C. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2021.3126387 · Cited by 657
VBench: Comprehensive Benchmark Suite for Video Generative Models
Huang, Z., He, Y., Yu, J., Zhang, F., Si, C., Jiang, Y., Zhang, Y., Wu, T., Jin, Q., Chanpaisit, N., et al. (2024) · 2024 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr52733.2024.02060 · Cited by 407
Blind Image Quality Assessment via Vision-Language Correspondence: A Multitask Learning Perspective
Zhang, W., Zhai, G., Wei, Y., Yang, X., & Ma, K. (2023) · 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.01352 · Cited by 325
Self-citationPerceptual video quality assessment: a survey
Min, X., Duan, H., Sun, W., Zhu, Y., & Zhai, G. (2024) · Science China Information Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11432-024-4133-3 · Cited by 218
Metadata
- Authors
- Fang, Y., Zhu, H., Zeng, Y., Ma, K., & Wang, Z.
- Venue
- 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2020-06
- Pages
- 3674-3683
- ISSN
- 1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3035595647
- Cited by
- 375
- References
- 45
- FWCI
- 13.54
- 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: Perceptual Quality Assessment of Smartphone Photography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00373
- The paper
- Fang, Y., Zhu, H., Zeng, Y., Ma, K., & Wang, Z. (2020). Perceptual Quality Assessment of Smartphone Photography. 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00373
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.
