Evaluation of video artifact perception using event-related potentials

When new computer graphics algorithms for image and video editing, rendering or compression are developed, the quality of the results has to be evaluated and compared. Since the produced media are usually to be presented to an audience it is important to predict image and video quality as it would be perceived by a human observer. This can be done by applying some image quality metric or by expensive and time consuming user studies. Typically, statistical image quality metrics do not correlate to quality perceived by a human observer. More sophisticated HVS-inspired algorithms often do not generalize to arbitrary images. A drawback of user studies is that perceived image or video quality is filtered by a decision process, which, in turn, may be influenced by the performed task and chosen quality scale. To get an objective view on (subjectively) perceived image quality, electroencephalography can be used. In this paper we show that artifacts appearing in videos elicit a measurable brain response which can be analyzed using the event-related potentials technique. Since electroencephalography itself requires an elaborate procedure, we aim to find a minimal setup to reduce time and participants needed to conduct a reliable study of image and video quality. As a first step we demonstrate that the reaction to a video with or without an artifact can be identified by an off-the-shelf support vector machine, which is trained on a set of previously recorded responses, with a reliability of up to 80% from a single recorded electroencephalogram.

[1]  Marcus A. Magnor,et al.  Assessing the quality of compressed images using EEG , 2011, 2011 18th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[2]  Rajiv Soundararajan,et al.  Study of Subjective and Objective Quality Assessment of Video , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[3]  Claus Bahlmann,et al.  In a Blink of an Eye and a Switch of a Transistor: Cortically Coupled Computer Vision , 2010, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[4]  Steve McLaughlin,et al.  Comparative study of textural analysis techniques to characterise tissue from intravascular ultrasound , 1996, Proceedings of 3rd IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[5]  David H. Laidlaw,et al.  Thoughts on User Studies: Why, How and When , 1993 .

[6]  A Mouraux,et al.  Across-trial averaging of event-related EEG responses and beyond. , 2008, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[7]  E. Amenedo,et al.  MMN in the visual modality: a review , 2003, Biological Psychology.

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

[9]  Hidehiko Hayashi,et al.  Assessment of extra high quality images using both EEG and assessment words on high order sensations , 2000, Smc 2000 conference proceedings. 2000 ieee international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. 'cybernetics evolving to systems, humans, organizations, and their complex interactions' (cat. no.0.

[10]  Christian Mühl,et al.  EEG analysis for implicit tagging of video data , 2009, 2009 3rd International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction and Workshops.

[11]  Victoria Interrante,et al.  User Studies: Why, How, and When? , 2003, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[12]  Ann McNamara,et al.  Perceptually-motivated graphics, visualization and 3D displays , 2010, SIGGRAPH '10.

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

[14]  Paul S. Fisher,et al.  Image quality measures and their performance , 1995, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[15]  Desney S. Tan,et al.  Combining brain computer interfaces with vision for object categorization , 2008, 2008 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[16]  H.-J. Zepernick,et al.  Perceptual-based Quality Metrics for Image and Video Services: A Survey , 2007, 2007 Next Generation Internet Networks.

[17]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines , 2011, TIST.

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