Cited by 391Image and Video Quality AssessmentDigital Media Forensic DetectionImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quality Assessment of In-the-Wild Videos

Open access
Li, Dingquan, Jiang, Tingting, Jiang, Ming·2019·Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Multimedia

Abstract

Quality assessment of in-the-wild videos is a challenging problem because of the absence of reference videos and shooting distortions. Knowledge of the human visual system can help establish methods for objective quality assessment of in-the-wild videos. In this work, we show two eminent effects of the human visual system, namely, content-dependency and temporal-memory effects, could be used for this purpose. We propose an objective no-reference video quality assessment method by integrating both effects into a deep neural network. For content-dependency, we extract features from a pre-trained image classification neural network for its inherent content-aware property. For temporal-memory effects, long-term dependencies, especially the temporal hysteresis, are integrated into the network with a gated recurrent unit and a subjectively-inspired temporal pooling layer. To validate the performance of our method, experiments are conducted on three publicly available in-the-wild video quality assessment databases: KoNViD-1k, CVD2014, and LIVE-Qualcomm, respectively. Experimental results demonstrate that our proposed method outperforms five state-of-the-art methods by a large margin, specifically, 12.39%, 15.71%, 15.45%, and 18.09% overall performance improvements over the second-best method VBLIINDS, in terms of SROCC, KROCC, PLCC and RMSE, respectively. Moreover, the ablation study verifies the crucial role of both the content-aware features and the modeling of temporal-memory effects. The PyTorch implementation of our method is released at https://github.com/lidq92/VSFA.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3343031.3351028

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 41 references

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Cho Kyunghyun, 2014, Caglar Gulcehre, Dzmitry Bahdanau, Fethi Bougares, Holger Schwenk, and Yoshua Bengio.
  2. Dodge Samuel, Understanding how image quality affects deep neural networks
  3. Fan Lijie, 2018, Boqing Gong, and Junzhou Huang.
  4. Kaiming He Xiangyu Zhang Shaoqing Ren and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In CVPR. 770--778. Kaiming He Xiangyu Zhang Shaoqing Ren and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In CVPR. 770--778.
  5. Hosu Vlad, The Konstanz natural video database (KoNViD-1k)
  6. Kingma Diederik P, 2014, Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 · arXiv
  7. Nuutinen Mikko, 2016, CVD2014--A database for evaluating no-reference video quality assessment algorithms. IEEE TIP, 25
  8. Adam Paszke Sam Gross Soumith Chintala Gregory Chanan Edward Yang Zachary DeVito Zeming Lin Alban Desmaison Luca Antiga and Adam Lerer. 2017. Automatic differentiation in PyTorch. In NIPS-W. Adam Paszke Sam Gross Soumith Chintala Gregory Chanan Edward Yang Zachary DeVito Zeming Lin Alban Desmaison Luca Antiga and Adam Lerer. 2017. Automatic differentiation in PyTorch. In NIPS-W.
  9. Rimac-Drlje Snjezana, Influence of temporal pooling method on the objective video quality evaluation
  10. Seufert Michael, A comparison of temporal pooling methods for HTTP adaptive video streaming
  11. Xu Jingtao, No-reference video quality assessment via feature learning
  12. Zhang Yu, 2018, Blind Video Quality Assessment with Weakly Supervised Learning and Resampling Strategy. TCSVT
  13. Zhang Yu, 2019, Objective Video Quality Assessment Combining Transfer Learning With CNN. TNNLS
  14. Zhu Yun, Blind video quality assessment based on spatio-temporal internal generative mechanism

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 391

Metadata

Authors
Li, D., Jiang, T., & Jiang, M.
Affiliations
Peking University (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Multimedia
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-10-15
Pages
2351-2359
OpenAlex
W2965644659
Cited by
387
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 76 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 10
FWCI
9.05
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM International Conference on Multimedia (ACM MM) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • the National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) (2015CB351803)
  • the Natural Science Foundation of China (61572042, 61520106004, 61527804)
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 video quality assessment, human visual system, temporal memory, gated recurrent unit, temporal pooling, long-range dependencies

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