Abstract
Most of the current quality assessment techniques interpret an image quality as a measure of its fidelity with another reference image, assuming the availability of that “perfect” image. It has been the concern of many researchers around the world to algorithmically assess the quality of image sequences based on human visual perception. This paper presents a novel technique for quantitatively assessing the quality of image sequences without the need for a reference image and in a way that precisely correlates to human judgement on quality. This research is a part of a larger framework that incorporates multi-objective optimisation algorithms to optimise the quality metrics of compressed videos acquired by autonomous vehicles and transmitted over low-bandwidth communication channels. Our system was trained on a dataset that involved 700 videos of 5 different categories. We validate the performance of our model and show that it highly correlates to the human subjective quality assessment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Field, A. (2000). Discovering statistics using SPSS for windows: advanced techniques for beginners. Newbury Park: Sage.
Deekshatulu, B. L., Kulkarni, A. D., & Rao, K. R. (1985). Quantitative evaluation of enhancement techniques. Signal Processing, 8, 369–375. doi:10.1016/0165-1684(85)90113-6.
Wang, D. C. C., Vagnucci, A. H., & Li, C. C. (1983). Digital image enhancement: a survey. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing Journal, 24(3), 363–381.
Abdou, I. E., & Pratt, W. K. (1979). Qualitative design and evaluation of enhancement/thresholding edge detector. Proceedings of IEEE, 67(5), 753–763. doi:10.1109/PROC.1979.11325.
Richardson, I. E. (2003). H.264 and MPEG-4 video compression coding for next-generation multimedia. New York: Wiley.
Lubin, J. (1993). The use of psychophysical data and models in the analysis of display system performance. In A. B. Watson (Ed.), Digital images and human vision (pp. 163–178). Cambridge: MIT.
Singh, M., Singh, S., & Partridge, D. (2004). A knowledge based framework for image enhancement in aviation security. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. Part B, 34(6), 2354–2365. doi:10.1109/TSMCB.2004.835077.
Teo, P. C., & Heeger, D. J. (1994). Perceptual image distortion. Proceedings of the IEEE ICIP, 2, 982–986.
Daly, S. (1993). The visible differences predictor: an algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity. In A. B. Watson (Ed.), Digital images and human vision (pp. 179–206). Cambridge: MIT.
Pappas, T. N., & Safranek, R. J. (2000). Perceptual criteria for image quality evaluation. In A. Bovik (Ed.), Handbook of image and video processing (pp. 669–684). San Diego: Academic.
Ren, W., Weal, P., Singh, M., & Singh, S. (2006). Minerva video retrieval benchmark. International Conference on Signal Processing, Pattern Recognition and Applications (SPPRA 2006), Innsbruck, Austria, February 15–17.
Coolican, H. (2004). Research methods and statistics in psychology. Oxon: Hodder & Stoughton.
Acknowledgment
This work has been initiated in collaboration with the Computer Vision Lab at the Research School of Informatics/Loughborough University. The authors gratefully acknowledge the suggestions and technical assistance of Prof. S. Singh and Dr. M. Singh.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Al-Najdawi, A., Kalawsky, R.S. Visual Quality Assessment of Video and Image Sequences—A Human-based Approach. J Sign Process Syst Sign Image Video Technol 59, 223–231 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11265-008-0289-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11265-008-0289-0