The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 25 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
No-Reference Image Quality Assessment in the Spatial Domain
Abstract
We propose a natural scene statistic-based distortion-generic blind/no-reference (NR) image quality assessment (IQA) model that operates in the spatial domain. The new model, dubbed blind/referenceless image spatial quality evaluator (BRISQUE) does not compute distortion-specific features, such as ringing, blur, or blocking, but instead uses scene statistics of locally normalized luminance coefficients to quantify possible losses of "naturalness" in the image due to the presence of distortions, thereby leading to a holistic measure of quality. The underlying features used derive from the empirical distribution of locally normalized luminances and products of locally normalized luminances under a spatial natural scene statistic model. No transformation to another coordinate frame (DCT, wavelet, etc.) is required, distinguishing it from prior NR IQA approaches. Despite its simplicity, we are able to show that BRISQUE is statistically better than the full-reference peak signal-to-noise ratio and the structural similarity index, and is highly competitive with respect to all present-day distortion-generic NR IQA algorithms. BRISQUE has very low computational complexity, making it well suited for real time applications. BRISQUE features may be used for distortion-identification as well. To illustrate a new practical application of BRISQUE, we describe how a nonblind image denoising algorithm can be augmented with BRISQUE in order to perform blind image denoising. Results show that BRISQUE augmentation leads to performance improvements over state-of-the-art methods. A software release of BRISQUE is available online: http://live.ece.utexas.edu/research/quality/BRISQUE_release.zip for public use and evaluation.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
BRISQUE is a no-reference, distortion-generic image quality model that operates in the spatial domain by fitting natural scene statistics of locally normalized luminance coefficients and their pairwise products, then mapping features to quality with SVR. It is statistically better than PSNR and SSIM, competitive with NR methods, efficient, and useful for blind denoising.
Key findings
- On the LIVE IQA database, BRISQUE achieved median SROCC 0.9395 and LCC 0.9424 across 1000 train-test splits; it was statistically better than full-reference PSNR and SSIM, highly competitive with NR algorithms, and slightly inferior to FR MS-SSIM.
- BRISQUE features also supported distortion classification, with median accuracy 88.6% overall: WN 100.0%, Blur 96.7%, JPEG 88.9%, JP2K 82.9%, and FF 83.3%; FF and JP2K were most confused.
- Computational complexity was low: for a 512 × 768 image on a 1.8-GHz single-core PC with 2 GB RAM, BRISQUE took 1 s, versus DIIVINE 149 s, BLIINDS-II 70 s, and PSNR 0.05 s.
- BRISQUE-augmented BM3D blind denoising was statistically superior to reference BM3D at the 95% confidence level for all simulated noise variances except 0.0316; on TID2008, BRISQUE’s overall SROCC was 0.896, compared with PSNR 0.870 and SSIM 0.902.
Methods
- The model computes mean subtracted contrast normalized (MSCN) coefficients via local mean subtraction and divisive normalization, fits a GGD to MSCN coefficients, and fits AGGD models to pairwise products along horizontal, vertical, main-diagonal, and secondary-diagonal orientations. It extracts 36 features (18 per scale at two scales) and maps them to quality using an SVM regressor with an RBF kernel.
- Evaluation used the LIVE IQA database (29 reference images, 779 distorted images, five distortion categories), with random 80% training / 20% testing splits, no content overlap, 1000 repetitions, and median SROCC/LCC; statistical significance was assessed with one-sided t-tests.
- Database independence was tested by training on all of LIVE and applying BRISQUE to TID2008; blind denoising used 300 Berkeley images, 10 Gaussian noise levels (3000 noisy images), 1000 training and 2000 testing images, with BRISQUE features predicting the BM3D input noise parameter.
Limitations
- Stated: BRISQUE remains slightly inferior to FR MS-SSIM, indicating room for improvement; the two-stage version showed a slight dip attributed to imperfect distortion identification; TID2008 testing used only 24 natural images and only distortions BRISQUE was trained for (JPEG, JP2K, WN, blur; FF absent); performance decreases when the window size becomes fairly large.
- Evident from the text: BRISQUE requires a training/calibration procedure with subjective quality scores, and its evaluation and denoising application depend on known distortion or noise conditions used in training.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
21 Own result · 14 Not checked yet · 14 No basis given · 12 Own interpretation · 6 Sources not found · 4 Own method
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It can be visualized that different distortions occupy different parts of the space.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Fig. 5(a), pristine and distorted images occupy different regions in this parameter space.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite its simplicity, we are able to show that BRISQUE is statistically better than the full-reference peak signal-tonoise ratio and the structural similarity index, and is highly competitive with respect to all present-day distortion-generic NR IQA algorithms.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We observed that increasing the number of scales beyond 2 did not contribute to performance much.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results show that BRISQUE augmentation leads to performance improvements over state-of-the-art methods.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite its simplicity, we are able to show that BRISQUE is statistically better than the full-reference peak signal-tonoise ratio and the structural similarity index, and is highly competitive with respect to all present-day distortion-generic NR IQA algorithms.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“We have found that a generalized Gaussian distribution (GGD) can be used to effectively capture a broader spectrum of distorted image statistics, which often exhibit changes in the tail behaviour (i.e. kurtosis) of the empirical coefficient distributions [32]”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] [32] K. Sharifi and A. Leon-Garcia, 'Estimation of shape parameter for generalized Gaussian distributions in subband decompositions of video,' IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol. , vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 52-56, Feb. 1995. - source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: MSCN coefficient distributions are symmetric.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We note that BRISQUE remains slightly inferior to the FR MS-SSIM, indicating that there may still be some room for improvement in performance.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The performance of the algorithm drastically improves, if a (systematically) different parameter selected based on perceptual quality is fed as input to the algorithm.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Further, we also showed that BRISQUE is computationally efficient and that its efficiency is superior to other distortion-generic approaches to NR IQA, thus making BRISQUE an attractive option for practical applications like image denoising.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 23
- Probably not a substantial claim. 18
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While MSCN coefficients are definitely more homogenous for pristine images, the signs of adjacent coefficients also exhibit a regular structure, which gets disturbed in the presence of distortion.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“JPEG2000 and fast fading have a high degree of overlap as fast fading images in LIVE database are actually multidistorted, first compressed into a bitstream using a JPEG2000 codec, then passed through a Rayleigh fast fading channel to simulate packet loss [27].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [27] [27] H. R. Sheikh, M. F. Sabir, and A. C. Bovik, 'A statistical evaluation of recent full reference image quality assessment algorithms,' IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 3440-3451, Nov. 2006. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The normalized luminance coefficients (explained later) of the natural image closely follow Gaussian-like distribution, as shown in Fig. 1(c) while the same doesnot hold for the empirical distribution of the artificial image shown in Fig. 1(d).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [4] [4] N. Ponomarenko, V. Lukin, A. Zelensky, K. Egiazarian, M. Carli, and F. Battisti, 'TID2008-a database for evaluation of full-reference visual quality assessment metrics,' Adv. Modern Radioelectron. , vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 30-45, 2009. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“BRISQUE has very low computational complexity, making it well suited for real time applications.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Fig. 8, we plot the Spearman's rank ordered correlation coefficient (SROCC) between each of these features and human DMOS from the LIVE IQA database, for each of the distortions in the database JPEG and JPEG2000 compression, additive white Gaussian noise, Gaussian blur and a Rayleigh fast fading channel distortion, to ascertain how well the features correlate with human judgments of quality.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While we have found that this density function is a good model of the empirical histograms of products of adjacent normalized coefficients, it has only a single parameter, and as such, does not provide a good fit to the empirical histograms of coefficient products (Fig. 2) from distorted images. Further, it is not finite at the origin.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“White noise is very clearly separated from the pristine image set making it one of the easiest to gauge the quality of”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“From Table V we conclude that BRISQUE is highly competitive with all no reference algorithms tested and statistically better than the full reference algorithms PSNR and SSIM.”
- Also stated in: § VI. CONCLUSION · p. 13 · boosted
“We then undertook a thorough evaluation of the BRISQUE index in terms of correlation with human perception and demonstrated that BRISQUE is statistically better than FR PSNR and SSIM as well as highly competitive to all NR algorithms compared with.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [47] [47] D. Sheskin, Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures . London, U.K.: Chapman & Hall, 2004. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § VI. CONCLUSION · p. 13 · boosted
In the paper
“Notice that our approach produces better visual quality, and better objective quality, as gauged by the multi-scale structural similarity index (MS-SSIM) [29].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [29] [29] Z. Wang, E. P. Simoncelli, and A. C. Bovik, 'Multiscale structural similarity for image quality assessment,' in Proc. Asilomar Conf. Signals, Syst. Comput. , vol. 2. 2003, pp. 1398-1402. -
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Our analysis indicates that for all noise variances simulated in the present data, our approach is statistically superior to the reference BM3D implementation in terms of perceived visual quality at the 95% confidence level, excepting when the noise variance is a tiny 0.0316 - where the two approaches become statistically indistinguishable.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [55] [55] L. V. Hedges and I. Olkin, Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis . New York: Academic, 1985. <!-- image --> Anish Mittal received the B.Tech. degree in electrical engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, India, and the M.S. degree in computer engineering from The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, in 2009 and 2011, respectively. He joined the Laboratory for Image and Video Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, in 2009, where he has been an Assistant Director since January 2012. His research interests include image and video processing, machine le
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“JP2K and JPEG are also confused sometimes.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Having demonstrated that BRISQUE performs well in terms of correlation with human perception, we also now show that BRISQUE has low complexity.”
- Also stated in: § VI. CONCLUSION · p. 13 · boosted
“Further, we also showed that BRISQUE is computationally efficient and that its efficiency is superior to other distortion-generic approaches to NR IQA, thus making BRISQUE an attractive option for practical applications like image denoising.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § VI. CONCLUSION · p. 13 · boosted
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As Table X demonstrates, BRISQUE is quite efficient, outperforming the DIIVINE index and the BLIINDS-II index by a large amount.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As observed from the Table IV, the performance of BRISQUE remains relatively stable with respect to variation in the window size used to compute the local mean and variances. However, the performance starts to decrease when it becomes fairly large as the computations become non-local.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Each of the distorted images has an associated difference mean opinion score (DMOS) which represents the subjective quality of the image.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [27] [27] H. R. Sheikh, M. F. Sabir, and A. C. Bovik, 'A statistical evaluation of recent full reference image quality assessment algorithms,' IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 3440-3451, Nov. 2006. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“BRISQUE features may be used for distortion-identification as well.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The product of our research is the Blind/Referenceless Image Spatial QUality Evaluator (BRISQUE) which utilizes an NSS model framework of locally normalized luminance coefficients and quantifies 'naturalness' using the parameters of the model.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The performance of any IQA model is best gauged by its correlation with human subjective judgements of quality, since the human is the ultimate receiver of the visual signal.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Further, we repeat this random train-test procedure 1000 times and report the median of the performance across these 1000 iterations, in order to eliminate performance bias.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The regularity of natural scene statistics (NSS) has been well established in the visual science literature, where regularity has been demonstrated in the spatial domain [15], and in the wavelet domain [16].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] [15] D. L. Ruderman, 'The statistics of natural images,' Netw. Comput. Neural Syst. , vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 517-548, 1994. -
- Not checked yetcites [16] [16] A. Srivastava, A. B. Lee, E. P. Simoncelli, and S. C. Zhu, 'On advances in statistical modeling of natural images,' J. Math. Imag. Vis. , vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 17-33, 2003. -
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our claim is that characterizing locally normalized luminance coefficients in this way is sufficient not only to quantify naturalness, but also to quantify quality in the presence of distortion.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although PSNR is a poor measure of perceptual quality, it is often used to benchmark for QA algorithms [41], [42].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [41] [41] Z. Wang and A. C. Bovik, 'Mean squared error: Love it or leave it? A new look at signal fidelity measures,' IEEE Signal Process. Mag. , vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 98-117, Jan. 2009. - source
- Not checked yetcites [42] [42] B. Girod, 'What's wrong with mean squared error?' in Visual Factors of Electronic Image Communications , A. B. Watson Ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993, pp. 207-220. -
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we divide the LIVE database into two randomly chosen subsets - 80% training and 20% testing - such that no overlap between train and test content occurs.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, it is well known that the power spectrum of natural images is a function of frequency and takes the form 1 / f γ , where γ is an exponent that varies over a small range across natural images.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] [15] D. L. Ruderman, 'The statistics of natural images,' Netw. Comput. Neural Syst. , vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 517-548, 1994. -
- Not checked yetcites [16] [16] A. Srivastava, A. B. Lee, E. P. Simoncelli, and S. C. Zhu, 'On advances in statistical modeling of natural images,' J. Math. Imag. Vis. , vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 17-33, 2003. -
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To illustrate a new practical application of BRISQUE, we describe how a nonblind image denoising algorithm can be augmented with BRISQUE in order to perform blind image denoising.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“We used the LIVE IQA database [27] to test the performance of BRISQUE, which consists of 29 reference images with 779 distorted images spanning five different distortion categories - JPEG2000 (JP2K) and JPEG compression, additive white Gaussian noise (WN), Gaussian blur (Blur), and a Rayleigh fast-fading channel simulation (FF).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [27] [27] H. R. Sheikh, M. F. Sabir, and A. C. Bovik, 'A statistical evaluation of recent full reference image quality assessment algorithms,' IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 3440-3451, Nov. 2006. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The slight dip in the performance can be attributed to imperfect distortion identification in the first stage of the two-stage framework.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our contribution here is a new NR IQA model that is purely spatial; that relies on a spatial NSS model which does not require a mapping to a different co-ordinate domain (wavelet, DCT, etc.) and so is 'transform-free';”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although image denoising is a well studied problem in image processing [50]-[54], blind image denoising remains relatively underexplored [49], [54].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [49] [49] X. Zhu and P. Milanfar, 'Automatic parameter selection for denoising algorithms using a no-reference measure of image content,' IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 19, no. 12, pp. 3116-3132, Dec. 2010. -
- Not checked yetcites [54] [54] K. Dabov, A. Foi, V. Katkovnik, and K. Egiazarian, 'Image denoising by sparse 3-D transform-domain collaborative filtering,' IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 2080-2095, Aug. 2007. -
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The denoising algorithm that we use is the one proposed in [54], which requires as input the noise variance in the image.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [54] [54] K. Dabov, A. Foi, V. Katkovnik, and K. Egiazarian, 'Image denoising by sparse 3-D transform-domain collaborative filtering,' IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 2080-2095, Aug. 2007. -
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“1000 images were then used for training and 2000 for testing thereby ensuring no content overlap between the two sets.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The TID database consists of 25 reference images and 1700 distorted images over 17 distortion categories [4].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [4] [4] N. Ponomarenko, V. Lukin, A. Zelensky, K. Egiazarian, M. Carli, and F. Battisti, 'TID2008-a database for evaluation of full-reference visual quality assessment metrics,' Adv. Modern Radioelectron. , vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 30-45, 2009. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We use unoptimized MATLAB code for all of these algorithms in order to ensure a fair comparison.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notice that BRISQUE augmentation is not limited to the BM3D algorithm; and any non-blind algorithm could be improved by using BRISQUE natural scene features to produce a blind image denoiser.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Existing blind image denoising algorithms typically address parameter estimation in an ad-hoc fashion without regard to natural scene statistics.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The computational efficiency and excellent quality prediction performance makes BRISQUE an attractive option for practical applications.”
- Also stated in: § VI. CONCLUSION · p. 13 · boosted
“Further, we also showed that BRISQUE is computationally efficient and that its efficiency is superior to other distortion-generic approaches to NR IQA, thus making BRISQUE an attractive option for practical applications like image denoising.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Also stated in: § VI. CONCLUSION · p. 13 · boosted
In the paper
“The work closest in concept to this approach is the one proposed in [49] where image content measures were used to predict the noise variance in the image, which was then used for image denoising; however the approach is computationally intensive and the measure of content in the image may not be the ideal measure to predict noise variance.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [49] [49] X. Zhu and P. Milanfar, 'Automatic parameter selection for denoising algorithms using a no-reference measure of image content,' IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 19, no. 12, pp. 3116-3132, Dec. 2010. -
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The MSCN coefficients are zero mean and unit variance.
“assuming the MSCN coeffficients are zero mean and unit variance”
The paper relies on this without support.
Distortions affect image structure across scales.
“Images are naturally multiscale, and distortions affect image structure across scales.”
The paper relies on this without support.
MSCN coefficient distributions are symmetric.
“We choose the zero mean distribution, since (generally) MSCN coefficient distributions are symmetric.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Existing blind image denoising algorithms typically address parameter estimation in an ad-hoc fashion without regard to natural scene statistics.
“The proposed algorithms typically address parameter estimation in an ad-hoc fashion without regard to natural scene statistics.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
§ C. Statistical Significance and Hypothesis Testing · p. 10
“| MSSSIM | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |”
§ C. Statistical Significance and Hypothesis Testing · p. 10
“| BRISQUE | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ G. Computational Complexity · p. 11
“parameter estimation needs to be performed only 5 times for an entire image”
§ A. Natural Scene Statistics in the Spatial Domain · p. 6
“Hence, we extract all features listed in Table I at two scales -the original image scale, and at a reduced resolution (low pass filtered and downsampled by a factor of 2).”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ C. Statistical Significance and Hypothesis Testing · p. 10
“| PSNR | 0 | - 1 | - 1 | - 1 | - 1 | 1 | - 1 | - 1 |”
§ C. Statistical Significance and Hypothesis Testing · p. 10
“| BLIINDS-II | 1 | - 1 | - 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | - 1 | - 1 |”
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
Self-citationLIBSVM: A library for support vector machines
Chang, C.-C., & Lin, C.-J. (2011) · ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology · doi:10.1145/1961189.1961199 · Cited by 40,918
A Tutorial on Support Vector Machines for Pattern Recognition
Burges, C. J. C. (1998) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1023/a:1009715923555 · Cited by 16,615
Wasserman, S. S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,361
Libsvm : A library for support vector machines
Ferrari, V. (2008) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 10,123
Image denoising by sparse 3-D transform-domain collaborative filtering
Dabov, K., Foi, A., Katkovnik, V., & Egiazarian, K. (2007) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2007.901238 · Cited by 9,283
Martin, D., Fowlkes, C., Tal, D., & Malik, J. (2002) · Proceedings Eighth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision. ICCV 2001 · doi:10.1109/iccv.2001.937655 · Cited by 8,216
A Non-Local Algorithm for Image Denoising
Buades, A., Coll, B., & Morel, J.-M. (2005) · 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2005.38 · Cited by 7,616
Multiscale structural similarity for image quality assessment
Wang, Z., Simoncelli, E. P., & Bovik, A. C. (2004) · The Thrity-Seventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems & Computers, 2003 · doi:10.1109/acssc.2003.1292216 · Cited by 6,253
Self-citationImage Denoising Via Sparse and Redundant Representations Over Learned Dictionaries
Elad, M., & Aharon, M. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2006.881969 · Cited by 5,321
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- wainwright, 2002, Statist Theories of the Brain, 203
- 10.1088/0954-898x/5/4/006 · DOI
- saad, 2012, BLIINDS Code
- moorthy, 2011, DIIVINE Code Implementation
- girod, 1993, Visual Factors of Electronic Image Communications, 207
- wang, 2003, MS-SSIM Code
- wang, 2004, SSIM Code
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
Self-citationBenchmarking Single-Image Dehazing and Beyond
Li, B., Ren, W., Fu, D., Tao, D., Feng, D., Zeng, W., & Wang, Z. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2018.2867951 · Cited by 2,451
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-citationConvolutional Neural Networks for No-Reference Image Quality Assessment
Kang, L., Ye, P., Li, Y., & Doermann, D. (2014) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2014.224 · Cited by 1,309
Deep Neural Networks for No-Reference and Full-Reference Image Quality Assessment
Bosse, S., Maniry, D., Muller, K.-R., Wiegand, T., & Samek, W. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2017.2760518 · Cited by 1,325
Underwater Image Restoration Based on Image Blurriness and Light Absorption
Peng, Y., & Cosman, P. C. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2017.2663846 · Cited by 1,258
Talebi, H., & Milanfar, P. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2018.2831899 · Cited by 1,194
MUSIQ: Multi-scale Image Quality Transformer
Ke, J., Wang, Q., Wang, Y., Milanfar, P., & Yang, F. (2021) · IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv48922.2021.00510 · Cited by 1,189
The Perception-Distortion Tradeoff
Blau, Y., & Michaeli, T. (2018) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2018.00652 · Cited by 1,077
Blind image quality evaluation using perception based features
Venkatanath, N., Praneeth, D., Bh, M. C., Channappayya, S. S., & Medasani, S. S. (2015) · National Conference on Communications · doi:10.1109/ncc.2015.7084843 · Cited by 998
Blind Image Quality Assessment Using a Deep Bilinear Convolutional Neural Network
Zhang, W., Ma, K., Yan, J., Deng, D., & Wang, Z. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology · doi:10.1109/tcsvt.2018.2886771 · Cited by 1,027
Real-World Underwater Enhancement: Challenges, Benchmarks, and Solutions Under Natural Light
Liu, R., Fan, X., Zhu, M. B., Hou, M., & Luo, Z. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology · doi:10.1109/tcsvt.2019.2963772 · Cited by 929
Blindly Assess Image Quality in the Wild Guided by a Self-Adaptive Hyper Network
Su, S., Yan, Q., Zhu, Y., Zhang, C., Ge, X., Sun, J., & Zhang, Y. (2020) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00372 · Cited by 963
Referenceless Prediction of Perceptual Fog Density and Perceptual Image Defogging
Choi, L. K., You, J., & Bovik, A. C. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2015.2456502 · Cited by 867
Self-citationO-HAZE: A Dehazing Benchmark with Real Hazy and Haze-Free Outdoor Images
Ancuti, C. O., Ancuți, C., Timofte, R., & Vleeschouwer, C. D. (2018) · IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) · doi:10.1109/cvprw.2018.00119 · Cited by 819
Real-Time Video Super-Resolution with Spatio-Temporal Networks and Motion Compensation
Caballero, J., Ledig, C., Aitken, A. P., Acosta, A., Totz, J., Wang, Z., & Shi, W. (2017) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.304 · Cited by 799
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 936
Waterloo 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
Massive Online Crowdsourced Study of Subjective and Objective Picture Quality
Ghadiyaram, D., & Bovik, A. C. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2015.2500021 · Cited by 782
Self-citationKonIQ-10k: An Ecologically Valid Database for Deep Learning of Blind Image Quality Assessment
Hosu, V., Lin, H., Sziranyi, T., & Saupe, D. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2020.2967829 · Cited by 759
No-reference image quality assessment based on spatial and spectral entropies
Liu, L., Liu, B., Huang, H., & Bovik, A. C. (2014) · Signal Processing Image Communication · doi:10.1016/j.image.2014.06.006 · Cited by 724
Self-citationPerceptual image quality assessment: a survey
Zhai, G., & Min, X. (2020) · Science China Information Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11432-019-2757-1 · Cited by 686
Blind Image Quality Assessment Using Joint Statistics of Gradient Magnitude and Laplacian Features
Xue, W., Mou, X., Zhang, L., Bovik, A. C., & Feng, X. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2014.2355716 · Cited by 641
Self-citationPerception and sensing for autonomous vehicles under adverse weather conditions: A survey
Zhang, Y., Carballo, A., Yang, H., & Takeda, K. (2023) · ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2022.12.021 · Cited by 715
AdaFace: Quality Adaptive Margin for Face Recognition
Kim, M., Jain, A. K., & Liu, X. (2022) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr52688.2022.01819 · Cited by 620
End-to-End Blind Image Quality Assessment Using Deep Neural Networks
Ma, K., Liu, W., Zhang, K., Duanmu, Z., Wang, Z., & Zuo, W. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2017.2774045 · Cited by 613
Learning a no-reference quality metric for single-image super-resolution
Ma, C., Yang, C., Yang, X., & Yang, M. (2017) · Computer Vision and Image Understanding · doi:10.1016/j.cviu.2016.12.009 · Cited by 609
The 2018 PIRM Challenge on Perceptual Image Super-Resolution
Blau, Y., Mechrez, R., Timofte, R., Michaeli, T., & Zelnik‐Manor, L. (2019) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-11021-5_21 · Cited by 609
Using Free Energy Principle For Blind Image Quality Assessment
Gu, K., Zhai, G., Yang, X., & Zhang, W. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Multimedia · doi:10.1109/tmm.2014.2373812 · Cited by 606
Reversible data hiding: Advances in the past two decades
Shi, Y.-Q., Li, X., Zhang, X., Wu, H., & Ma, B. (2016) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2016.2573308 · Cited by 598
Learning A Sparse Transformer Network for Effective Image Deraining
Chen, X., Li, H., Li, M., & Pan, J. (2023) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.00571 · Cited by 581
MANIQA: Multi-dimension Attention Network for No-Reference Image Quality Assessment
Yang, S., Wu, T., Shi, S., Lao, S., Gong, Y., Cao, M., Wang, J., & Yang, Y. (2022) · IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) · doi:10.1109/cvprw56347.2022.00126 · Cited by 554
RankIQA: Learning from Rankings for No-Reference Image Quality Assessment
Liu, X., van de Weijer, J., & Bagdanov, A. D. (2017) · IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2017.118 · Cited by 560
KADID-10k: A Large-scale Artificially Distorted IQA Database
Lin, H., Hosu, V., & Saupe, D. (2019) · 2019 Eleventh International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX) · doi:10.1109/qomex.2019.8743252 · Cited by 523
Blind Image Quality Estimation via Distortion Aggravation
Min, X., Zhai, G., Gu, K., Liu, Y., & Yang, X. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting · doi:10.1109/tbc.2018.2816783 · Cited by 518
NH-HAZE: An Image Dehazing Benchmark with Non-Homogeneous Hazy and Haze-Free Images
Ancuti, C. O., Ancuti, C., & Timofte, R. (2020) · 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) · doi:10.1109/cvprw50498.2020.00230 · Cited by 517
“Due to this limitation, earlier dehazing quality metrics were restricted to non-reference image quality metrics (NRIQA) [30, 31, 36].”
BackgroundBlind Image Quality Assessment Based on High Order Statistics Aggregation
Xu, J., Ye, P., Li, Q., Du, H., Liu, Y., & Doermann, D. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2016.2585880 · Cited by 490
A Deep Journey into Super-resolution
Anwar, S., Khan, S. H., & Barnes, N. M. (2020) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3390462 · Cited by 505
MetaIQA: Deep Meta-Learning for No-Reference Image Quality Assessment
Zhu, H., Li, L., Wu, J., Dong, W., & Shi, G. (2020) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.01415 · Cited by 467
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
I-HAZE: A Dehazing Benchmark with Real Hazy and Haze-Free Indoor Images
Ancuți, C., Ancuti, C. O., Timofte, R., & Vleeschouwer, C. D. (2018) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-01449-0_52 · Cited by 458
Fully Deep Blind Image Quality Predictor
Kim, J., & Lee, S. (2016) · IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/jstsp.2016.2639328 · Cited by 463
Blind Quality Assessment Based on Pseudo-Reference Image
Min, X.-K., Gu, K., Zhai, G.-T., Liu, J., Yang, X.-K., & Chen, C. W. (2018) · IEEE transactions on multimedia · doi:10.1109/tmm.2017.2788206 · Cited by 426
Learning a No-Reference Quality Assessment Model of Enhanced Images With Big Data
Gu, K., Tao, D., Qiao, J., & Lin, W. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2017.2649101 · Cited by 449
A Comparative Study for Single Image Blind Deblurring
Lai, W., Huang, J., Hu, Z., Ahuja, N., & Yang, M. (2016) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.188 · Cited by 446
Seven Challenges in Image Quality Assessment: Past, Present, and Future Research
Chandler, D. M. (2013) · ISRN Signal Processing · doi:10.1155/2013/905685 · Cited by 427
Song, W., Wang, Y., Huang, D., & Tjondronegoro, D. (2018) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-00776-8_62 · Cited by 419
Deep Image Deblurring: A Survey
Zhang, K., Ren, W., Luo, W., Lai, W., Stenger, B., Yang, M., & Li, H. (2022) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-022-01633-5 · Cited by 436
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
Self-citationPSD: Principled Synthetic-to-Real Dehazing Guided by Physical Priors
Chen, Z., Wang, Y., Yang, Y., & Liu, D. (2021) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr46437.2021.00710 · Cited by 394
The Analysis of Image Contrast: From Quality Assessment to Automatic Enhancement
Gu, K., Zhai, G., Lin, W., & Liu, M. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/tcyb.2015.2401732 · Cited by 390
Quality Assessment of In-the-Wild Videos
Li, D., Jiang, T., & Jiang, M. (2019) · Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Multimedia · doi:10.1145/3343031.3351028 · Cited by 387
Perceptual Quality Assessment of Smartphone Photography
Fang, Y., Zhu, H., Zeng, Y., Ma, K., & Wang, Z. (2020) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00373 · Cited by 387
No-Reference Quality Metric of Contrast-Distorted Images Based on Information Maximization
Gu, K., Lin, W., Zhai, G., Yang, X., Zhang, W., & Chen, C. W. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/tcyb.2016.2575544 · Cited by 373
An Experiment-Based Review of Low-Light Image Enhancement Methods
Wang, W., Wu, X., Yuan, X., & Gao, Z. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2992749 · Cited by 373
Blind Image Quality Assessment via Deep Learning
Hou, W., Gao, X., Tao, D., & Li, X. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2014.2336852 · Cited by 370
UGC-VQA: Benchmarking Blind Video Quality Assessment for User Generated Content
Tu, Z., Wang, Y., Birkbeck, N., Adsumilli, B., & Bovik, A. C. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2021.3072221 · Cited by 363
“We also avoid using duplicate features in different models, such as the BRISQUE-like features in HIGRADE, and the C-DIIVINE features in V-BLIINDS.”
MethodInfluentialSelf-citationSong, W., Wang, Y., Huang, D., Liotta, A., & Perra, C. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting · doi:10.1109/tbc.2019.2960942 · Cited by 361
D-HAZY: A dataset to evaluate quantitatively dehazing algorithms
Ancuți, C., Ancuti, C. O., & Vleeschouwer, C. D. (2016) · Proceedings - International Conference on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/icip.2016.7532754 · Cited by 360
Benchmarking Low-Light Image Enhancement and Beyond
Liu, J., Xu, D., Yang, W., Fan, M., & Huang, H. (2021) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-020-01418-8 · Cited by 379
A Completely Blind Video Integrity Oracle
Mittal, A., Saad, M. A., & Bovik, A. C. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2015.2502725 · Cited by 357
Self-citationTwo-Level Approach for No-Reference Consumer Video Quality Assessment
Korhonen, J. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2019.2923051 · Cited by 354
dipIQ: Blind Image Quality Assessment by Learning-to-Rank Discriminable Image Pairs
Ma, K., Liu, W., Liu, T., Wang, Z., & Tao, D. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2017.2708503 · Cited by 365
Uncertainty-Aware Blind Image Quality Assessment in the Laboratory and Wild
Zhang, W., Ma, K., Zhai, G., & Yang, X. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2021.3061932 · Cited by 367
On the use of deep learning for blind image quality assessment
Bianco, S., Celona, L., Napoletano, P., & Schettini, R. (2017) · Signal Image and Video Processing · doi:10.1007/s11760-017-1166-8 · Cited by 366
Blind Image Quality Assessment via Vision-Language Correspondence: A Multitask Learning Perspective
Zhang, W., Zhai, G., Wei, Y., Yang, X., & Ma, K. (2023) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.01352 · Cited by 392
No-Reference Quality Assessment of Contrast-Distorted Images Based on Natural Scene Statistics
Fang, Y., Ma, K., Wang, Z., Lin, W., Fang, Z., & Zhai, G. (2014) · IEEE Signal Processing Letters · doi:10.1109/lsp.2014.2372333 · Cited by 343
Objective quality assessment of multiply distorted images
Jayaraman, D., Mittal, A., Moorthy, A. K., & Bovik, A. C. (2012) · Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers (ACSSC) · doi:10.1109/acssc.2012.6489321 · Cited by 337
Self-citationUnified Blind Quality Assessment of Compressed Natural, Graphic, and Screen Content Images
Min, X.-K., Ma, K.-D., Gu, K., Zhai, G.-T., Wang, Z., & Lin, W.-S. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2017.2735192 · Cited by 271
Deep CNN-Based Blind Image Quality Predictor
Kim, J., Nguyen, D. C., & Lee, S. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2018.2829819 · Cited by 339
Image super-resolution: A comprehensive review, recent trends, challenges and applications
Lepcha, D. C., Goyal, B., Dogra, A., & Goyal, V. (2022) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2022.10.007 · Cited by 342
Perceptual quality prediction on authentically distorted images using a bag of features approach
Ghadiyaram, D., & Bovik, A. C. (2017) · Journal of Vision · doi:10.1167/17.1.32 · Cited by 322
Self-citationNo-Reference Image Sharpness Assessment in Autoregressive Parameter Space
Gu, K., Zhai, G., Lin, W., Yang, X., & Zhang, W. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2015.2439035 · Cited by 317
Wang, Y., Song, W., Fortino, G., Qi, L., Zhang, W., & Liotta, A. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2932130 · Cited by 316
Large-Scale Study of Perceptual Video Quality
Sinno, Z., & Bovik, A. C. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2018.2869673 · Cited by 310
Self-citationContrastive Semi-Supervised Learning for Underwater Image Restoration via Reliable Bank
Huang, S., Wang, K., Liu, H., Chen, J., & Li, Y. (2023) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.01740 · Cited by 305
Image Quality Assessment Using Contrastive Learning
Madhusudana, P. C., Birkbeck, N., Wang, Y., Adsumilli, B., & Bovik, A. C. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2022.3181496 · Cited by 295
Self-citationTOPIQ: A Top-Down Approach From Semantics to Distortions for Image Quality Assessment
Chen, C., Mo, J., Hou, J., Wu, H., Liao, L., Sun, W., Yan, Q., & Lin, W. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2024.3378466 · Cited by 351
Image Sharpness Assessment Based on Local Phase Coherence
Hassen, R., Wang, Z., & Salama, M. M. A. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2013.2251643 · Cited by 289
Blind image quality assessment by relative gradient statistics and adaboosting neural network
Liu, L., Hua, Y., Zhao, Q., Huang, H., & Bovik, A. C. (2015) · Signal Processing Image Communication · doi:10.1016/j.image.2015.10.005 · Cited by 283
Self-citationKim, J., Zeng, H., Ghadiyaram, D., Lee, S., Zhang, L., & Bovik, A. C. (2017) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2017.2736018 · Cited by 283
Self-citationLightening Network for Low-Light Image Enhancement
Wang, L.-W., Liu, Z.-S., Siu, W.-C., & Lun, D. P.-K. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2020.3008396 · Cited by 287
Objective Quality Evaluation of Dehazed Images
Min, X., Zhai, G., Gu, K., Yang, X., & Guan, X. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · doi:10.1109/tits.2018.2868771 · Cited by 275
Hallucinated-IQA: No-Reference Image Quality Assessment via Adversarial Learning
Lin, K.-Y., & Wang, G. (2018) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2018.00083 · Cited by 284
No-Reference Image Blur Assessment Based on Discrete Orthogonal Moments
Li, L., Lin, W., Wang, X., Yang, G., Bahrami, K., & Kot, A. C. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/tcyb.2015.2392129 · Cited by 272
Deep Learning of Human Visual Sensitivity in Image Quality Assessment Framework
Kim, J., & Lee, S. (2017) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.213 · Cited by 270
Underwater Image Enhancement Quality Evaluation: Benchmark Dataset and Objective Metric
Jiang, Q., Gu, Y., Li, C., Cong, R., & Shao, F. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology · doi:10.1109/tcsvt.2022.3164918 · Cited by 270
Low-Light Image Enhancement with Wavelet-Based Diffusion Models
Jiang, H., Luo, A., Fan, H., Han, S., & Liu, S. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Graphics · doi:10.1145/3618373 · Cited by 267
Review of medical image quality assessment
Chow, L. S., & Paramesran, R. (2016) · Biomedical Signal Processing and Control · doi:10.1016/j.bspc.2016.02.006 · Cited by 266
FAST-VQA: Efficient End-to-End Video Quality Assessment with Fragment Sampling
Wu, H., Chen, C., Hou, J., Liao, L., Wang, A., Sun, W., Yan, Q., & Lin, W. (2022) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-20068-7_31 · Cited by 286
Multi-frame Quality Enhancement for Compressed Video
Yang, R., Xu, M., Wang, Z., & Li, T. (2018) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2018.00697 · Cited by 259
Quality Evaluation of Image Dehazing Methods Using Synthetic Hazy Images
Min, X., Zhai, G., Gu, K., Zhu, Y., Zhou, J., Guo, G., Yang, X., Guan, X., & Zhang, W. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Multimedia · doi:10.1109/tmm.2019.2902097 · Cited by 256
UCL-Dehaze: Toward Real-World Image Dehazing via Unsupervised Contrastive Learning
Wang, Y., Yan, X., Wang, F. L., Xie, H., Yang, W., Zhang, X.-P. S., Qin, J., & Wei, M. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2024.3362153 · Cited by 265
A Deep Learning based No-reference Quality Assessment Model for UGC Videos
Sun, W., Min, X., Lu, W., & Zhai, G. (2022) · ACM International Conference on Multimedia (ACM MM) · doi:10.1145/3503161.3548329 · Cited by 267
Low-Light Image Enhancement via Progressive-Recursive Network
Li, J., Feng, X., & Hua, Z. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology · doi:10.1109/tcsvt.2021.3049940 · Cited by 259
Screen Content Quality Assessment: Overview, Benchmark, and Beyond
Min, X., Gu, K., Zhai, G., Yang, X., Zhang, W., Callet, P. L., & Chen, C. W. (2021) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3470970 · Cited by 249
Bringing Old Photos Back to Life
Wan, Z., Zhang, B., Chen, D., Zhang, P., Chen, D., Liao, J., & Wen, F. (2020) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00282 · Cited by 252
Musallam, A. S., Sobhy, A., & Hussein, M. K. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3140289 · Cited by 248
A Perception-Aware Decomposition and Fusion Framework for Underwater Image Enhancement
Kang, Y., Jiang, Q., Li, C., Ren, W., Liu, H., & Wang, P. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology · doi:10.1109/tcsvt.2022.3208100 · Cited by 243
Gu, K., Wang, S., Zhai, G., Ma, S., Yang, X., Lin, W., Zhang, W., & Gao, W. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Multimedia · doi:10.1109/tmm.2016.2518868 · Cited by 241
Metadata
- Authors
- Mittal, A., Moorthy, A. K., & Bovik, A. C.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- ORCID
- Bovik, A. C.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
- Published
- 2012-12
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 4695-4708
- ISSN
- 1057-7149 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-0042
- OpenAlex
- W1982471090
- Semantic Scholar
- a2cad4e4fd946adf6cc87e483b2ba18579de1264
- Cited by
- 6,064
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 652 · 2025: 861 · 2024: 758 · 2023: 707 · 2022: 645 · 2021: 490 · 2020: 426 · 2019: 387 · 2018: 334 · 2017: 268 · 2016: 208 · 2015: 151 · 2014: 129 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 107.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Video Quality Assessment
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
- Keywords
- no-reference image quality assessment, BRISQUE, natural scene statistics, spatial domain features, blind image denoising
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
