Defect visibility and content importance: Effects on perceived impairment

Signal Processing: Image Communication

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 185-203

  Moore, Michael S ^a   Foley, John M ^b   Mitra, Sanjit K ^a  

^a University of California   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Content importance; Detection; Impairment; Objective models

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; IMAGE COMPRESSION; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE SEGMENTATION; PROBABILITY; SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO;

ENHANCEMENT ALGORITHMS; OBJECTIVE MODELS;

IMAGE PROCESSING;

EID: 0346972567     PISSN: 09235965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.image.2003.10.004     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. A.J. Ahumada, Simplified vision models for image-quality assessment, in: Proceedings of SID, San Diego, CA, USA, 1996, pp. 397-400.
2. I.R. BT.500-8, Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures, 1998.
3. Cermak G.W., Wolf S., Tweedy E.P., Pinson M.H., Webster A.A. Validating objective measures of MPEG video quality. SMPTE J. 107(4):1998;226-235.
4. Daly S. The visible differences predictor: an algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity. Watson A.B. Digital Images and Human Vision. 1993;179-206 MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
5. Engeldrum P.G. Psychometric Scaling: A Tool for Imaging Systems Development. 2000;Imcotek Press, Winchester, MA.
6. C. Fenimore, B. Field, C. Van Degrift, Test patterns and quality metrics for digital video compression, in: Proceedings of Human Vision and Electronic Imaging II, San Jose, CA, Vol. 3016, 1997, pp. 269-276.
7. R. Hamberg, H. de Ridder, Continuous assessment of time-varying image quality, in: Proceedings of Human Vision and Electronic Imaging II, San Jose, CA, 1997, Vol. 3016, pp. 248-259.
8. J.M. Libert, C.P. Fenimore, Visibility thresholds for compression-induced image blocking: measurements and models, in: Proceedings of Human Vision and Electronic Imaging IV, San Jose, CA, Vol. 3644, 1999, pp. 197-206.
9. J.M. Libert, C.P. Fenimore, P. Roitman, Simulation of graded video impairment by weighted summation: validation of the methodology, in: Proceedings of Multimedia Systems and Applications II, Boston, MA, Vol. 3845, 1999, pp. 254-265.
10. J. Lubin, A human vision system model for objective picture quality measurements, in: Proceedings of the International Broadcasting Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1997, pp. 498-503.
11. Ma W.-Y., Manjunath B.S. A texture thesaurus for browsing large aerial photographs. J. Amer. Soc. Inform. Sci. 49(7):1998;633-648.
12. Mukherjee D., Chae J.J., Mitra S.K., Manjunath B.S. A source and channel-coding framework for vector-based data hiding in video. IEEE Trans. Circuits Systems Video Technol. 10(4):2000;630-645.
13. D. Pearson, Viewer response to time-varying video quality, in: Proceedings of Human Vision and Electronic Imaging III, San Jose, CA, USA, Vol. 3299, 1998, pp. 16-25.
14. Rohaly A.M., Ahumada J., A.B. Watson A.J., Object detection in natural backgrounds predicted by discrimination performance and models. Vision Res. 37(23):1997;3225-3235.
15. A.M. Rohaly, et al., Final report from the video quality experts group on the validation of objective models of video quality assessment, Technical Report, Video Quality Experts Group, 2000.
16. D.A. Silverstein, J.E. Farrell, The relationship between image fidelity and image quality, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Image Processing, Lausanne, Switzerland, Vol. 1, 1996, pp. 881-884.
17. Snedecor G.W., Cochran W.G. Statistical Methods. 1989;Iowa State University Press, Ames.
18. K. Tan, M. Ghanbari, Monitoring the quality of MPEG coded video, in: Proceedings of the European Signal Processing Conference, Rhodes, Greece, Vol. 2, 1998, pp. 1065-1068.
19. C.C. Taylor, Z. Pizlo, J.P. Allebach, Perceptually relevant image fidelity, in: Proceedings of Human Vision and Electronic Imaging III, San Jose, CA, USA, 1998.
20. Thurnhofer S., Mitra S.K. A general framework for quadratic volterra filters for edge enhancement. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 5(6):1996;950-963.
21. van den Branden Lambrecht C.J., Kunt M. Characterization of human visual sensitivity for video imaging applications. Signal Processing. 67(3):1998;255-269.
22. Video Quality Experts Group, VQEG subjective test plan, 1999.
23. Watson A.B. Digital Images and Human Vision. 1993;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
24. A.B. Watson, Towards a visual quality metric for digital video, in: Proceedings of the European Signal Processing Conference, Rhodes, Greece, Vol. 2, 1998.
25. Watson A.B., Pelli D.G. QUEST: a Bayesian adaptive psychometric method, Percept. Psychophys. 33(2):1983;113-120.
26. Winkler S. Issues in vision modeling for perceptual video quality assessment. Signal Processing. 78(2):1999;231-252.
27. S. Winkler, Vision models and quality metrics for image processing applications, Ph.D. Dissertation, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, 2000.
28. E.M. Yeh, A.C. Kokaram, N.G. Kingsbury, Psychovisual measurement and distortion metrics for image sequences, in: Proceedings of the European Signal Processing Conference, Rhodes, Greece, Vol. 2, 1998, pp. 1061-1064.