ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
The performance of objective image quality assessment (IQA) models has been evaluated primarily by comparing model predictions to human quality judgments. Perceptual datasets gathered for this purpose have provided useful benchmarks for improving IQA methods, but their heavy use creates a risk of overfitting. Here, we perform a large-scale comparison of IQA models in terms of their use as objectives for the optimization of image processing algorithms. Specifically, we use eleven full-reference IQA models to train deep neural networks for four low-level vision tasks: denoising, deblurring, super-resolution, and compression. Subjective testing on the optimized images allows us to rank the competing models in terms of their perceptual performance, elucidate their relative advantages and disadvantages in these tasks, and propose a set of desirable properties for incorporation into future IQA models.
Quality control (QC) in medical image analysis is time-consuming and laborious, leading to increased interest in automated methods. However, what is deemed suitable quality for algorithmic processing may be different from human-perceived measures of
An end-to-end image analysis pipeline is presented for the abdominal MRI protocol used in the UK Biobank on the first 38,971 participants. Emphasis is on the processing steps necessary to ensure a high-level of data quality and consistency is produce
Image quality assessment (IQA) is the key factor for the fast development of image restoration (IR) algorithms. The most recent IR methods based on Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) have achieved significant improvement in visual performance, bu
Image quality assessment (IQA) is the key factor for the fast development of image restoration (IR) algorithms. The most recent perceptual IR algorithms based on generative adversarial networks (GANs) have brought in significant improvement on visual
This paper presents a quarter Laplacian filter that can preserve corners and edges during image smoothing. Its support region is $2times2$, which is smaller than the $3times3$ support region of Laplacian filter. Thus, it is more local. Moreover, this