ZTE Communications ›› 2019, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (1): 38-47.DOI: 10.12142/ZTECOM.201901007
收稿日期:
2018-06-09
出版日期:
2019-02-20
发布日期:
2019-11-14
DUAN Huiyu, ZHAI Guangtao, MIN Xiongkuo, ZHU Yucheng, FANG Yi, YANG Xiaokang
Received:
2018-06-09
Online:
2019-02-20
Published:
2019-11-14
About author:
DUAN Huiyu (huiyuduan@sjtu.edu.cn) received the B.E. degree from the University of Electronic Science and Technology of China in 2017. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree at the Institute of Image Communication and Network Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China. His research interests include image quality assessment, visual attention modeling, and perceptual signal processing.|ZHAI Guangtao received the B.E. and M.E. degrees from Shandong University, China in 2001 and 2004, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree from Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China in 2009. From 2008 to 2009, he was a visiting student with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada, where he was a post-doctoral fellow from 2010 to 2012. From 2012 to 2013, he was a Humboldt Research Fellow with the Institute of Multimedia Communication and Signal Processing, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany. He is currently a Research Professor with the Institute of Image Communication and Information Processing, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. His research interests include multimedia signal processing and perceptual signal processing. He received the National Excellent Ph.D. Thesis Award from the Ministry of Education of China in 2012.|MIN Xiongkuo received the B.E. degree from Wuhan University, China in 2013, and the Ph.D. degree from Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China in 2018. From 2016 to 2017, he was a visiting student with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Waterloo, Canada. He is currently a post-doctoral fellow with Shanghai Jiao Tong University. His research interests include image quality assessment, visual attention modeling, and perceptual signal processing. He received the Best Student Paper Award from the IEEE ICME 2016.|ZHU Yucheng received the B.E. degree from the Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China in 2015. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree at the Institute of Image Communication and Network Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. His research interests include image quality assessment, visual attention modeling, and perceptual signal processing. He received Grand Challenge Best Performance Awards in ICME 2017 and 2018.|FANG Yi is an undergraduate student at Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China and will receive the B.E. degree in 2019. She will pursue the M.E. degree at the Institute of Image Communication and Network Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Her research interests include image quality assessment, visual attention modeling, and perceptual signal processing.|YANG Xiaokang received the B.S. degree from Xiamen University, China in 1994, the M.S. degree from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, China in 1997, and the Ph.D. degree from Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China in 2000. From 2000 to 2002, he was a Research Fellow with the Centre for Signal Processing, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. From 2002 to 2004, he was a Research Scientist with the Institute for Infocomm Research, Singapore. From 2007 to 2008, he visited the Institute for Computer Science, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany, as an Alexander von Humboldt Research Fellow. He is currently a Distinguished Professor with the School of Electronic Information and Electrical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, where he is also the Deputy Director of the Institute of Image Communication and Information Processing. His current research interests include image processing and communication, computer vision, and machine learning.
. [J]. ZTE Communications, 2019, 17(1): 38-47.
DUAN Huiyu, ZHAI Guangtao, MIN Xiongkuo, ZHU Yucheng, FANG Yi, YANG Xiaokang. Perceptual Quality Assessment of Omnidirectional Images: Subjective Experiment and Objective Model Evaluation[J]. ZTE Communications, 2019, 17(1): 38-47.
Figure 5. The scatter diagrams of head movement direction or eye viewing direction weight proportion along with latitude, clustering over all the subjects and all the omnidirectional images; a) One-term fitting curves of head movement direction; b) one-term fitting curves of eye viewing direction; c) two-term fitting curves of head movement direction; d) two-term fitting curves of eye viewing direction; e) three-term fitting curves of head movement direction; f) three-term fitting curves of eye viewing direction.
Parameter | α1 | β1 | γ1 | α2 | β2 | γ2 | α3 | β3 | γ3 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fitting value (head) | -0.2404 | 72.75 | 7.53 | 0.7957 | 81.19 | 12.53 | 0.1353 | 77.78 | 40.94 |
Fitting value (eye) | 0.4943 | 92.75 | 6.05 | 0.2622 | 91.03 | 13.53 | 0.1288 | 81.26 | 48.26 |
Table 1 The coefficient values of head movement direction fitting curves and eye viewing direction fitting curves
Parameter | α1 | β1 | γ1 | α2 | β2 | γ2 | α3 | β3 | γ3 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fitting value (head) | -0.2404 | 72.75 | 7.53 | 0.7957 | 81.19 | 12.53 | 0.1353 | 77.78 | 40.94 |
Fitting value (eye) | 0.4943 | 92.75 | 6.05 | 0.2622 | 91.03 | 13.53 | 0.1288 | 81.26 | 48.26 |
Figure 6. The global saliency weight map generated from global viewing direction bias: a) Global head movement characteristic map; b) global eye viewing preference map.
a) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images on equirectangular format images | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9188 | 0.9140 | 5.6800 | |||
GMSD | 0.7412 | 0.7378 | 9.6574 | |||
GMSM | 0.6768 | 0.6642 | 10.590 | |||
GSI | 0.9008 | 0.8924 | 6.2473 | |||
IW-MSE | 0.6207 | 0.7328 | 11.280 | |||
IW-PSNR | 0.7371 | 0.7328 | 9.7223 | |||
IW-SSIM | 0.7805 | 0.7766 | 8.9934 | |||
MSE | 0.3279 | 0.4971 | 13.590 | |||
MS-SSIM | 0.6745 | 0.6653 | 10.621 | |||
PSNR | 0.5060 | 0.4971 | 12.408 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.5271 | 0.3479 | 12.225 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8888 | 0.8800 | 6.5917 | |||
VIF | 0.7878 | 0.7867 | 8.8614 | |||
VIFp | 0.7555 | 0.7501 | 9.4246 | |||
VSI | 0.9087 | 0.9055 | 6.0059 | |||
b) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images on cubic format images | ||||||
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9316 | 0.9278 | 5.2273 | |||
GMSD | 0.7120 | 0.7042 | 10.101 | |||
GMSM | 0.6448 | 0.6393 | 10.996 | |||
GSI | 0.9215 | 0.9162 | 5.5878 | |||
IW-MSE | 0.6165 | 0.7110 | 11.327 | |||
IW-PSNR | 0.7179 | 0.7054 | 10.014 | |||
IW-SSIM | 0.7799 | 0.7755 | 9.0045 | |||
MSE | 0.3919 | 0.5693 | 13.235 | |||
MS-SSIM | 0.6699 | 0.6651 | 10.681 | |||
PSNR | 0.5621 | 0.5603 | 11.898 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.4462 | 0.3870 | 12.875 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8843 | 0.8740 | 6.7175 | |||
VIF | 0.7725 | 0.7716 | 9.1351 | |||
VIFp | 0.7761 | 0.7699 | 9.0723 | |||
VSI | 0.9236 | 0.9192 | 5.5158 | |||
c) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images combining head movement direction information ( | ||||||
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9118 | 0.9049 | 5.9061 | |||
GMSM | 0.6530 | 0.7035 | 10.895 | |||
MSE | 0.3420 | 0.5026 | 13.518 | |||
PSNR | 0.4123 | 0.3958 | 13.106 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.4481 | 0.3663 | 12.861 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8967 | 0.8844 | 6.3664 | |||
VSI | 0.9009 | 0.8946 | 6.2451 | |||
d) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images combining eye viewing direction information ( | ||||||
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9148 | 0.9078 | 5.8090 | |||
GMSM | 0.7350 | 0.7283 | 9.7549 | |||
MSE | 0.3407 | 0.5175 | 13.525 | |||
PSNR | 0.4364 | 0.4154 | 12.943 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.4665 | 0.3849 | 12.725 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8988 | 0.8849 | 6.3075 | |||
VSI | 0.9064 | 0.9005 | 6.0783 | |||
e) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images combining original saliency map from subjects | ||||||
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9113 | 0.9015 | 5.9245 | |||
GMSM | 0.7508 | 0.7449 | 9.5026 | |||
MSE | 0.3475 | 0.5317 | 13.489 | |||
PSNR | 0.4858 | 0.4534 | 12.574 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.5083 | 0.4077 | 12.388 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8927 | 0.8779 | 6.4817 | |||
VSI | 0.9086 | 0.9027 | 6.0071 |
Table 2 Performance of FR-IQA models in terms of PLCC, SRCC and RMSE. The best three performing metrics are highlighted with bold font
a) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images on equirectangular format images | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9188 | 0.9140 | 5.6800 | |||
GMSD | 0.7412 | 0.7378 | 9.6574 | |||
GMSM | 0.6768 | 0.6642 | 10.590 | |||
GSI | 0.9008 | 0.8924 | 6.2473 | |||
IW-MSE | 0.6207 | 0.7328 | 11.280 | |||
IW-PSNR | 0.7371 | 0.7328 | 9.7223 | |||
IW-SSIM | 0.7805 | 0.7766 | 8.9934 | |||
MSE | 0.3279 | 0.4971 | 13.590 | |||
MS-SSIM | 0.6745 | 0.6653 | 10.621 | |||
PSNR | 0.5060 | 0.4971 | 12.408 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.5271 | 0.3479 | 12.225 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8888 | 0.8800 | 6.5917 | |||
VIF | 0.7878 | 0.7867 | 8.8614 | |||
VIFp | 0.7555 | 0.7501 | 9.4246 | |||
VSI | 0.9087 | 0.9055 | 6.0059 | |||
b) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images on cubic format images | ||||||
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9316 | 0.9278 | 5.2273 | |||
GMSD | 0.7120 | 0.7042 | 10.101 | |||
GMSM | 0.6448 | 0.6393 | 10.996 | |||
GSI | 0.9215 | 0.9162 | 5.5878 | |||
IW-MSE | 0.6165 | 0.7110 | 11.327 | |||
IW-PSNR | 0.7179 | 0.7054 | 10.014 | |||
IW-SSIM | 0.7799 | 0.7755 | 9.0045 | |||
MSE | 0.3919 | 0.5693 | 13.235 | |||
MS-SSIM | 0.6699 | 0.6651 | 10.681 | |||
PSNR | 0.5621 | 0.5603 | 11.898 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.4462 | 0.3870 | 12.875 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8843 | 0.8740 | 6.7175 | |||
VIF | 0.7725 | 0.7716 | 9.1351 | |||
VIFp | 0.7761 | 0.7699 | 9.0723 | |||
VSI | 0.9236 | 0.9192 | 5.5158 | |||
c) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images combining head movement direction information ( | ||||||
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9118 | 0.9049 | 5.9061 | |||
GMSM | 0.6530 | 0.7035 | 10.895 | |||
MSE | 0.3420 | 0.5026 | 13.518 | |||
PSNR | 0.4123 | 0.3958 | 13.106 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.4481 | 0.3663 | 12.861 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8967 | 0.8844 | 6.3664 | |||
VSI | 0.9009 | 0.8946 | 6.2451 | |||
d) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images combining eye viewing direction information ( | ||||||
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9148 | 0.9078 | 5.8090 | |||
GMSM | 0.7350 | 0.7283 | 9.7549 | |||
MSE | 0.3407 | 0.5175 | 13.525 | |||
PSNR | 0.4364 | 0.4154 | 12.943 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.4665 | 0.3849 | 12.725 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8988 | 0.8849 | 6.3075 | |||
VSI | 0.9064 | 0.9005 | 6.0783 | |||
e) Assessing the perceptual quality of omnidirectional images combining original saliency map from subjects | ||||||
Metrics | PLCC | SRCC | RMSE | |||
FSIMc | 0.9113 | 0.9015 | 5.9245 | |||
GMSM | 0.7508 | 0.7449 | 9.5026 | |||
MSE | 0.3475 | 0.5317 | 13.489 | |||
PSNR | 0.4858 | 0.4534 | 12.574 | |||
SSIM1 | 0.5083 | 0.4077 | 12.388 | |||
SSIM2 | 0.8927 | 0.8779 | 6.4817 | |||
VSI | 0.9086 | 0.9027 | 6.0071 |
Figure 7. Omnidirectional images of equirectangular format or cubic format: a) Equirectangular image; b)-g) cubic images, which are Front, Right, Back, Left, top and bottom in sequence.
Figure 8. Scatter plots of subjective MOS versus FR-IQA model prediction, including FSIM, FSIMc, GMSD, GMSM, GSI, IW-MSE, IW-PSNR, IW-SSIM, MSE, MS-SSIM, PSNR, SSIM1, SSIM2, VIF, VIFp, and VSI, based on equirectangular format images. The distortion types are JPEG compression (red points), JPEG2000 compression (green points), WGN (magenta points), and GB (blue points).
Fig. 9. Scatter plots of subjective MOS versus FR-IQA model prediction, including FSIM, FSIMc, GMSD, GMSM, GSI, IW-MSE, IW-PSNR, IW-SSIM, MSE, MS-SSIM, PSNR, SSIM1, SSIM2, VIF, VIFp, and VSI, based on cubic format images. The distortion types are JPEG compression (red points), JPEG2000 compression (green points), WGN (magenta points), GB (blue points).
[1] | SHEIKH H R, WANG Z, CORMACK L , et al. Live Image Quality Assessment Database Release 2 [EB/OL]. (2005)[2018]. http://live.ece.utexas.edu/research/quality |
[2] | PONOMARENKO N, LUKIN V, ZELENSKY A . Tid2008-A Database for Evaluation of Full-Reference Visual Quality Assessment Metrics[J]. Advances of Modern Radioelectronics, 2009,10(4):30-45 |
[3] | LARSON E C, CHANDLER D . Categorical Image Quality (CSIQ) Database [EB/OL]. (2010)[2018]. http://vision.okstate.edu/csiq |
[4] | GU K, LIU M, ZHAI G T , et al. Quality Assessment Considering Viewing Distance and Image Resolution[J]. IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting, 2015,61(3):520-531. DOI: 10.1109/tbc.2015.2459851 |
[5] | RAI Y, LE CALLET P, GUILLOTEL P . Which Saliency Weighting for Omni Directional Image Quality Assessment? [C]//Ninth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), Erfurt, Germany, 2017: 1-6. DOI: 10.1109/QoMEX.2017.7965659 |
[6] | UPENIK E, RERÁBEK M, EBRAHIMI T . Testbed for Subjective Evaluation of Omnidirectional Visual Content [C]//2016 Picture Coding Symposium (PCS), Nuremberg, Germany, 2016: 1-5. DOI: 10.1109/PCS.2016.7906378 |
[7] | YU M, LAKSHMAN H, GIROD B . A Framework to Evaluate Omnidirectional Video Coding Schemes [C]//IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, Fukuoka, Japan, 2015: 31-36. DOI: 10.1109/ISMAR.2015.12 |
[8] | SUN W, GU K, ZHAI G T , et al. CVIQD: Subjective Quality Evaluation of Compressed Virtual Reality Images [C]//IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), Beijing, China, 2017: 3450-3454. DOI: 10.1109/ICIP.2017. 8296923 |
[9] | DUAN H Y, ZHAI G T, YANG X K , et al. IVQAD 2017: An Immersive Video Quality Assessment Database [C]//International Conference on Systems, Signals and Image Processing (IWSSIP), Poznan, Poland, 2017: 1-5. DOI: 10.1109/IWSSIP.2017.7965610 |
[10] | DUAN H Y, ZHAI G T, MIN X K , et al. Perceptual Quality Assessment of Omnidirectional Images [C]//IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS), Florence, Italy, 2018: 1-5. DOI: 10.1109/ISCAS.2018.8351786 |
[11] | ZHAI G T, CAI J F, LIN W S , et al. Cross-Dimensional Perceptual Quality Assessment for Low Bit-Rate Videos[J]. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2008,10(7):1316-1324. DOI: 10.1109/tmm.2008.2004910 |
[12] |
ZHAI G T, WU X L, YANG X K , et al. A Psychovisual Quality Metric in Free-Energy Principle[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2012,21(1):41-52. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2011.2161092
DOI URL |
[13] | GU K, ZHAI G T, YANG X K , et al. Using Free Energy Principle for Blind Image Quality Assessment[J]. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2015,17(1):50-63. DOI: 10.1109/tmm.2014.2373812 |
[14] | GU K, ZHAI G T, LIN W S , et al. No-Reference Image Sharpness Assessment in Autoregressive Parameter Space[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2015,24(10):3218-3231. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2015.2439035 |
[15] | ZHU W, ZHAI G, SUN W , et al. On the Impact of Environmental Sound on Perceived Visual Quality [C]//Pacific Rim Conference on Multimedia (PCM), Harbin, China, 2017: 723-734 |
[16] | XU M, LI C, LIU Y F , et al. A Subjective Visual Quality Assessment Method of Panoramic Videos [C]//IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME), Hong Kong, China, 2017: 517-522. DOI: 10.1109/ICME.2017.8019351 |
[17] | WALLACE G K . The JPEG still Picture Compression Standard [J]. IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 1992, 38(1): xviii-xxxiv. DOI: 10.1109/30.125072 |
[18] | SKODRAS A, CHRISTOPOULOS C, EBRAHIMI T . The JPEG 2000 still Image Compression Standard[J]. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 2001,18(5):36-58. DOI: 10.1109/79.952804 |
[19] | 7invensun. Aglass [EB/OL]. (2017)[2018]. http://www.aglass.com |
[20] | DUAN H Y, ZHAI G T, MIN X K , et al. Assessment of Visually Induced Motion Sickness in Immersive Videos [C]//18th Pacific-Rim Conference on Multimedia (PCM), Harbin, China, 2017, pp. 662-672. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-77380-3_63 |
[21] | RAI Y, CALLET P L . A dataset of head and eye movements for 360 degree images [C]//ACM on Multimedia Systems Conference, Taipei, China, 2017: 205-210. DOI: 10.1145/3083187.3083218 |
[22] | CURCIO C A, SLOAN K R, KALINA R E , et al. Human Photoreceptor Topography[J]. The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 1990,292(4):497-523. DOI: 10.1002/cne.902920402 |
[23] | ENGELKE U, ZHANG W, CALLET P L . Perceived Interest Versus Overt Visual Attention in Image Quality Assessment[J]. Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 9394, 2015. DOI: 10.1117/12.2086371 |
[24] |
ZHANG L, ZHANG L, MOU X Q , et al. FSIM: A Feature Similarity Index for Image Quality Assessment[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2011,20(8):2378-2386. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2011.2109730
DOI URL |
[25] |
XUE W F, ZHANG L, MOU X Q , et al. Gradient Magnitude Similarity Deviation: A Highly Efficient Perceptual Image Quality Index[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2014,23(2):684-695. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2013.2293423
DOI URL |
[26] |
LIU A M, LIN W S, NARWARIA M . Image Quality Assessment Based on Gradient Similarity[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2012,21(4):1500-1512. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2011.2175935
DOI URL |
[27] |
WANG Z, LI Q . Information Content Weighting for Perceptual Image Quality Assessment[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2011,20(5):1185-1198. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2010.2092435
DOI URL |
[28] | WANG Z, SIMONCELLI E P, BOVIK A C . Multiscale Structural Similarity for Image Quality Assessment [C]//Thrity-Seventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems & Computers, Pacific Grove, USA, 2003: 1398-1402. DOI: 10.1109/ACSSC.2003.1292216 |
[29] | WANG Z, BOVIK A C, SHEIKH H R , et al. Image Quality Assessment: From Error Visibility to Structural Similarity[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2004,13(4):600-612. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2003.819861 |
[30] | SHEIKH H R, BOVIK A C . Image Information and Visual Quality[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2006,15(2):430-444. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2005.859378 |
[31] |
ZHANG L, SHEN Y, LI H Y . VSI: A Visual Saliency-Induced Index for Perceptual Image Quality Assessment[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2014,23(10):4270-4281. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2014.2346028
DOI URL |
[32] | MIN X K, GU K, ZHAI G T , et al. Blind Quality Assessment Based on Pseudo-Reference Image[J]. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2018,20(8):2049-2062. DOI: 10.1109/tmm.2017.2788206 |
[33] | MIN X K, GU K, ZHAI G T , et al. Saliency-Induced Reduced-Reference Quality Index for Natural Scene and Screen Content Images[J]. Signal Processing, 2018,145:127-136. DOI: 10.1016/j.sigpro.2017.10.025 |
[34] | MIN X K, MA K D, GU K , et al. Unified Blind Quality Assessment of Compressed Natural, Graphic, and Screen Content Images[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2017,26(11):5462-5474. DOI: 10.1109/tip.2017. 2735192 |
No related articles found! |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||