Abstract
Assessing image quality is crucial in image processing tasks such as compression, super-resolution, and denoising. While subjective assessments involving human evaluators provide the most accurate quality scores, they are impractical for large-scale or continuous evaluations due to their high cost and time requirements. Pairwise comparison subjective assessment tests, which rank image pairs instead of assigning scores, offer more reliability and accuracy but require numerous comparisons, leading to high costs. Although objective quality metrics are more efficient, they lack the precision of subjective tests, which are essential for benchmarking and training learning-based quality metrics. This paper proposes an uncertainty-based sampling method to optimize the pairwise comparison subjective assessment process. By utilizing deep learning models to estimate human preferences and identify pairs that need human labeling, the approach reduces the number of required comparisons while maintaining high accuracy. The key contributions include modeling uncertainty for accurate preference predictions and for pairwise sampling. The experimental results demonstrate superior performance of the proposed approach compared to traditional active sampling methods. Software is publicly available at: shimamohammadi/LBPS-EIC [https://github.com/shimamohammadi/LBPS-EIC]
Full text
621 characters
· extracted from
oa-doi-fallback
· click to expand
There is a newer version available for this {{ publicationType }}. View latest version
{{ publication.field_name }}
{{ publication.subfield_name }}
Copyright: © {{ publicationYear }} {{ publication.presentation_authors[0].full_name + (publication.presentation_authors.length > 1 ? ' et al' : '') }}. This is an open access publication distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Check the {{ publicationType | capitalize }} Source for copyright and license information.
Listen on
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.