Cited by 826Image and Video Quality AssessmentDigital Media Forensic DetectionImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques

KonIQ-10k: An Ecologically Valid Database for Deep Learning of Blind Image Quality Assessment

Open access
Hosu, Vlad, Lin, Hanhe, Sziranyi, Tamas, Saupe, Dietmar·2020·IEEE Transactions on Image Processing

Abstract

Deep learning methods for image quality assessment (IQA) are limited due to the small size of existing datasets. Extensive datasets require substantial resources both for generating publishable content and annotating it accurately. We present a systematic and scalable approach to creating KonIQ-10k, the largest IQA dataset to date, consisting of 10,073 quality scored images. It is the first in-the-wild database aiming for ecological validity, concerning the authenticity of distortions, the diversity of content, and quality-related indicators. Through the use of crowdsourcing, we obtained 1.2 million reliable quality ratings from 1,459 crowd workers, paving the way for more general IQA models. We propose a novel, deep learning model (KonCept512), to show an excellent generalization beyond the test set (0.921 SROCC), to the current state-of-the-art database LIVE-in-the-Wild (0.825 SROCC). The model derives its core performance from the InceptionResNet architecture, being trained at a higher resolution than previous models (512 × 384). Correlation analysis shows that KonCept512 performs similar to having 9 subjective scores for each test image.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tip.2020.2967829

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [1][1] Bart Thomee, David A Shamma, Gerald Friedland, Benjamin Elizalde, Karl Ni, Douglas Poland, Damian Borth, and Li-Jia Li, 'Yfcc100m: The new data in multimedia research,' Communications of the ACM , vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 64-73, 2016. -
  2. [4][4] Nikolay Ponomarenko, Vladimir Lukin, Alexander Zelensky, Karen Egiazarian, Marco Carli, and Federica Battisti, 'Tid2008-a database for evaluation of fullreference visual quality assessment metrics,' Adv. of Modern Radioelectr. , vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 30-45, 2009. -
  3. [10][10] Vlad Hosu, Franz Hahn, Mohsen Jenadeleh, Hanhe Lin, Hui Men, Tam´ as Szir´ anyi, Shujun Li, and Dietmar Saupe, 'The konstanz natural video database (konvid1k),' in Intern. Conf. on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX) , 2017. -
  4. [17][17] Laurens Van der Maaten and Geoffrey Hinton, 'Visualizing data using t-sne,' Journal of Machine Learning Research , vol. 9, 2008. -
  5. [25][25] Oliver Wiedemann, Vlad Hosu, Hanhe Lin, and Dietmar Saupe, 'Disregarding the big picture: Towards local image quality assessment,' in QoMEX 2018: Tenth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience , 2018.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hosu, V., Lin, H., Sziranyi, T., & Saupe, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Konstanz (DE)
  • HUN-REN Institute for Computer Science and Control (HU)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
Published
2020
Volume
29
Pages
4041-4056
ISSN
  • 1057-7149 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0042
OpenAlex
W3002992380
Cited by
759
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 116 · 2025: 165 · 2024: 147 · 2023: 127 · 2022: 91 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 6
FWCI
30.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion)
  • Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (251654672 – TRR 161 (Project A05))
  • Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA 120499)
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, image quality database, ecological validity, in-the-wild images, high-resolution image classification

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