The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A new quality metric for image fusion
Abstract
We present three variants of a new quality metric for image fusion. The interest of our metrics, which are based on an image quality index recently introduced by Wang and Bovik in [Z. Wang et al., March 2002], lies in the fact that they do not require a ground-truth or reference image. We perform several simulations which show that our metrics are compliant with subjective evaluations and can therefore be used to compare different image fusion methods or to find the best parameters for a given fusion algorithm.
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
Cited by
Mean squared error: Love it or leave it? A new look at Signal Fidelity Measures
Wang, Z., & Bovik, A. C. (2009) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2008.930649 · Cited by 3,175
Remote sensing image fusion using the curvelet transform
Nencini, F., Garzelli, A., Baronti, S., & Alparone, L. (2007) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2006.02.001 · Cited by 788
Pixel convolutional neural network for multi-focus image fusion
Tang, H., Xiao, B., Li, W., & Wang, G. (2018) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2017.12.043 · Cited by 298
Metadata
- Authors
- Piella, G., & Heijmans, H.
- Venue
- Proceedings 2003 International Conference on Image Processing (Cat. No.03CH37429)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2004-06-03
- Volume
- 2
- Pages
- III-173-6
- ISSN
- 1522-4880 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1563899710
- Cited by
- 838
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 30.14
- 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: A new quality metric for image fusion. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/icip.2003.1247209
- The paper
- Piella, G., & Heijmans, H. (2004). A new quality metric for image fusion. Proceedings 2003 International Conference on Image Processing (Cat. No.03CH37429). https://doi.org/10.1109/icip.2003.1247209
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.
