Perceptual Fidelity Aware Mean Squared Error

How to measure the perceptual quality of natural images is an important problem in low level vision. It is known that the Mean Squared Error (MSE) is not an effective index to describe the perceptual fidelity of images. Numerous perceptual fidelity indices have been developed, while the representatives include the Structural SIMilarity (SSIM) index and its variants. However, most of those perceptual measures are nonlinear, and they cannot be easily dopted as an objective function to minimize in various low level vision tasks. Can MSE be perceptual fidelity aware after some minor adaptation? In this paper we propose a simple framework to enhance the perceptual fidelity awareness of MSE by introducing an l2-norm structural error term to it. Such a Structural MSE (SMSE) can lead to very competitive image quality assessment (IQA) results. More surprisingly, we show that by using certain structure extractors, SMSE can be further turned into a Gaussian smoothed MSE (i.e., the Euclidean distance between the original and distorted images after Gaussian smooth filtering), which is much simpler to calculate but achieves rather better IQA performance than SSIM. The so called Perceptual-fidelity Aware MSE (PAMSE) can have great potentials in applications such as perceptual image coding and perceptual image restoration.

[1]  Abdul Rehman,et al.  SSIM-based non-local means image denoising , 2011, 2011 18th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[2]  Wen Gao,et al.  Rate-SSIM optimization for video coding , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP).

[3]  Eric C. Larson,et al.  Most apparent distortion: full-reference image quality assessment and the role of strategy , 2010, J. Electronic Imaging.

[4]  Alfred M. Bruckstein,et al.  On Gabor's contribution to image enhancement , 1994, Pattern Recognit..

[5]  Alan C. Bovik,et al.  Mean squared error: Love it or leave it? A new look at Signal Fidelity Measures , 2009, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine.

[6]  Nikolay N. Ponomarenko,et al.  TID2008 – A database for evaluation of full-reference visual quality assessment metrics , 2004 .

[7]  D. G. Green,et al.  Contrast sensitivity of the human peripheral retina. , 1969, Vision research.

[8]  D. Gabor INFORMATION THEORY IN ELECTRON MICROSCOPY. , 1965, Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology.

[9]  Lei Zhang,et al.  Non-Shift Edge Based Ratio (NSER): An Image Quality Assessment Metric Based on Early Vision Features , 2011, IEEE Signal Processing Letters.

[10]  David J. Sakrison,et al.  The effects of a visual fidelity criterion of the encoding of images , 1974, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[11]  Alan C. Bovik,et al.  Image information and visual quality , 2006, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[12]  Xuanqin Mou,et al.  An image quality assessment metric based on Non-shift Edge , 2011, 2011 18th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[13]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  A comprehensive study on the relationship between the image quality and imaging dose in low-dose cone beam CT , 2011, Physics in medicine and biology.

[14]  Zhou Wang,et al.  On the Mathematical Properties of the Structural Similarity Index , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[15]  Thomas W. Parks,et al.  Image denoising using total least squares , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[16]  Edward R. Vrscay,et al.  SSIM-inspired image denoising using sparse representations , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP).

[17]  Yongkang Wong,et al.  Patch-based probabilistic image quality assessment for face selection and improved video-based face recognition , 2011, CVPR 2011 WORKSHOPS.

[18]  Gustavo de Veciana,et al.  An information fidelity criterion for image quality assessment using natural scene statistics , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[19]  J. Rabin The Retina: An Approachable Part of the Brain , 2013 .

[20]  Scott J. Daly,et al.  Visible differences predictor: an algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity , 1992, Electronic Imaging.

[21]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Maximum differentiation (MAD) competition: a methodology for comparing computational models of perceptual quantities. , 2008, Journal of vision.

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

[23]  Robert M. Gray,et al.  Toeplitz and Circulant Matrices: A Review , 2005, Found. Trends Commun. Inf. Theory.

[24]  Robert M. Gray,et al.  Toeplitz And Circulant Matrices: A Review (Foundations and Trends(R) in Communications and Information Theory) , 2006 .

[25]  Theophano Mitsa,et al.  Frequency-channel-based visual models as quantitative quality measures in halftoning , 1993, Electronic Imaging.

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

[27]  P. Tait Vector Analysis , 1893, Nature.

[28]  Albert J. Ahumada,et al.  Principled halftoning based on human vision models , 1992, Electronic Imaging.

[29]  Marcel Worring,et al.  Content-Based Image Retrieval at the End of the Early Years , 2000, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[30]  Zhong Liu,et al.  Perceptual image quality assessment using a geometric structural distortion model , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.