Image Quality Assessment: an Overview and some Metrological Considerations

This paper presents the state of the art in the field of Image Quality Assessment (IQA), providing a classification of some of the most important objective and subjective IQA methods. Furthermore, some aspects of the field are analysed from a metrological point of view, also through comparison with the software quality measurement area. In particular, a statistical approach to the evaluation of the uncertainty for IQA objective methods is presented and an example is provided. The topic of measurement modelling for subjective IQA methods is also analysed. Finally, a case study of images corrupted by impulse noise is discussed.

[1]  P. Carbone,et al.  Metrology and Software Measurement: a Comparison of some Basic Characteristics , 2006, 2006 IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference Proceedings.

[2]  Iain E. G. Richardson,et al.  H.264 and MPEG-4 Video Compression: Video Coding for Next-Generation Multimedia , 2003 .

[3]  S. Standard.  GUIDE TO THE EXPRESSION OF UNCERTAINTY IN MEASUREMENT , 2006 .

[4]  C. Glasman,et al.  Subjective assessment of compression systems by trained and untrained observers , 1997 .

[5]  Stefan Winkler,et al.  Perceptual blur and ringing metrics: application to JPEG2000 , 2004, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[6]  A. Bourret,et al.  Subjective quality assessment for objective quality model development , 2005 .

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

[8]  Etienne E. Kerre,et al.  Using similarity measures and homogeneity for the comparison of images , 2004, Image Vis. Comput..

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

[10]  V. Ralph Algazi,et al.  Objective picture quality scale (PQS) for image coding , 1998, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[11]  Alan C. Bovik,et al.  A Statistical Evaluation of Recent Full Reference Image Quality Assessment Algorithms , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[12]  Stephen H. Kan,et al.  Metrics and Models in Software Quality Engineering , 1994, SOEN.

[13]  Zhou Wang,et al.  Quality-aware images , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[14]  Fabrizio Russo,et al.  Automatic enhancement of noisy images using objective evaluation of image quality , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement.

[15]  Wilson S. Geisler,et al.  Image quality assessment based on a degradation model , 2000, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[16]  Bülent Sankur,et al.  Statistical evaluation of image quality measures , 2002, J. Electronic Imaging.

[17]  Philip Corriveau,et al.  Video Quality Experts Group , 2005 .

[18]  F. Russo,et al.  Impulse noise cancellation in image data using a two-output nonlinear filter , 2004 .

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

[20]  Zhou Wang,et al.  Why is image quality assessment so difficult? , 2002, 2002 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[21]  Andrew B. Watson,et al.  DCTune: A TECHNIQUE FOR VISUAL OPTIMIZATION OF DCT QUANTIZATION MATRICES FOR INDIVIDUAL IMAGES. , 1993 .

[22]  Mohammed Ghanbari,et al.  Recency effect in the subjective assessment of digitally-coded television pictures , 1995 .

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