Quality Index for Benchmarking Image Inpainting Algorithms with Guided Regional Statistics

This letter presents an objective quality index for benchmarking image inpainting algorithms. Under the guidance of the masks of damaged areas, the boundary region and the inpainting region are first located. Then, the statistical features are extracted from the boundary and inpainting regions respectively. For the boundary region, we utilize Weibull distribution to fit the gradient magnitude histograms of the exterior and interior regions around the boundary, and the Kullback-Leibler Divergence (KLD) is calculated to measure the boundary distortions caused by imperfect inpainting. Meanwhile, the quality of the inpainting region is measured by comparing the naturalness factors between the inpainted image and the reference image. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed metric outperforms the relevant state-of-the-art quality metrics. key words: quality evaluation, image inpainting, GRS, gradient magnitude, naturalness

[1]  Ivo F. Sbalzarini,et al.  Image Enhancement by Gradient Distribution Specification , 2014, ACCV Workshops.

[2]  Azeddine Beghdadi,et al.  Perceptual quality assessment for color image inpainting , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[3]  Hideaki Kimata,et al.  Image quality assessment for inpainted images via learning to rank , 2018, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[4]  Zhou Wang,et al.  Multiscale structural similarity for image quality assessment , 2003, The Thrity-Seventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems & Computers, 2003.

[5]  S Kullback,et al.  LETTER TO THE EDITOR: THE KULLBACK-LEIBLER DISTANCE , 1987 .

[6]  Jon Y. Hardeberg,et al.  Evaluation of Digital Inpainting Quality in the Context of Artwork Restoration , 2012, ECCV Workshops.

[7]  David Zhang,et al.  FSIM: A Feature Similarity Index for Image Quality Assessment , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[8]  Sen-Ching S. Cheung,et al.  Eye tracking based perceptual image inpainting quality analysis , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[9]  Gerhard Rigoll,et al.  Subjective and objective evaluation of image inpainting quality , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP).

[10]  Lei Zhang,et al.  Blind Image Quality Assessment Using Joint Statistics of Gradient Magnitude and Laplacian Features , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[11]  Weisi Lin,et al.  No-reference quality assessment of deblocked images , 2016, Neurocomputing.

[12]  Hongyu Li,et al.  VSI: A Visual Saliency-Induced Index for Perceptual Image Quality Assessment , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[13]  Paul A. Ardis,et al.  Visual salience metrics for image inpainting , 2009, Electronic Imaging.

[14]  Song Wang,et al.  An Evaluation Index Based on Parameter Weight for Image Inpainting Quality , 2008, 2008 The 9th International Conference for Young Computer Scientists.

[15]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[16]  Yuval Fisher Fractal Image Compression , 1994 .