The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Perceptual Quality Assessment for Multi-Exposure Image Fusion
Abstract
Multi-exposure image fusion (MEF) is considered an effective quality enhancement technique widely adopted in consumer electronics, but little work has been dedicated to the perceptual quality assessment of multi-exposure fused images. In this paper, we first build an MEF database and carry out a subjective user study to evaluate the quality of images generated by different MEF algorithms. There are several useful findings. First, considerable agreement has been observed among human subjects on the quality of MEF images. Second, no single state-of-the-art MEF algorithm produces the best quality for all test images. Third, the existing objective quality models for general image fusion are very limited in predicting perceived quality of MEF images. Motivated by the lack of appropriate objective models, we propose a novel objective image quality assessment (IQA) algorithm for MEF images based on the principle of the structural similarity approach and a novel measure of patch structural consistency. Our experimental results on the subjective database show that the proposed model well correlates with subjective judgments and significantly outperforms the existing IQA models for general image fusion. Finally, we demonstrate the potential application of the proposed model by automatically tuning the parameters of MEF algorithms.
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
Self-citationMultiscale 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 · cited 4×
“objective IQA model for MEF images based on the multiscale SSIM principle [27], [28] and a novel measure of”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationMean 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
Self-citation
Cited by
Wang, T., Zhang, K., Zhang, Y., Luo, W., Stenger, B., Lu, T., Kim, T.-K., & Liu, W. (2025) · Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1016/j.patcog.2025.111628 · Cited by 150
Xu, S., Ji, L., Wang, Z., Li, P., Sun, K., Zhang, C., & Zhang, J. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging · doi:10.1109/tci.2020.3039564 · Cited by 47
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ma, K., Zeng, K., & Wang, Z.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
- Published
- 2015-11
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3345-3356
- ISSN
- 1057-7149 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-0042
- OpenAlex
- W1580436348
- Cited by
- 1,190
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 21.66
- Type
- journal article
- 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 for Multi-Exposure Image Fusion. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tip.2015.2442920
- The paper
- Ma, K., Zeng, K., & Wang, Z. (2015). Perceptual Quality Assessment for Multi-Exposure Image Fusion. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing. https://doi.org/10.1109/tip.2015.2442920
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.