Subjective annotation for a frame interpolation benchmark using artefact amplification

Hui Men, Vlad Hosu, Hanhe Lin, Andrés Bruhn, Dietmar Saupe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Current benchmarks for optical flow algorithms evaluate the estimation either directly by comparing the predicted flow fields with the ground truth or indirectly by using the predicted flow fields for frame interpolation and then comparing the interpolated frames with the actual frames. In the latter case, objective quality measures such as the mean squared error are typically employed. However, it is well known that for image quality assessment, the actual quality experienced by the user cannot be fully deduced from such simple measures. Hence, we conducted a subjective quality assessment crowdscouring study for the interpolated frames provided by one of the optical flow benchmarks, the Middlebury benchmark. It contains interpolated frames from 155 methods applied to each of 8 contents. For this purpose, we collected forced-choice paired comparisons between interpolated images and corresponding ground truth. To increase the sensitivity of observers when judging minute difference in paired comparisons we introduced a new method to the field of full-reference quality assessment, called artefact amplification. From the crowdsourcing data (3720 comparisons of 20 votes each) we reconstructed absolute quality scale values according to Thurstone’s model. As a result, we obtained a re-ranking of the 155 participating algorithms w.r.t. the visual quality of the interpolated frames. This re-ranking not only shows the necessity of visual quality assessment as another evaluation metric for optical flow and frame interpolation benchmarks, the results also provide the ground truth for designing novel image quality assessment (IQA) methods dedicated to perceptual quality of interpolated images. As a first step, we proposed such a new full-reference method, called WAE-IQA, which weights the local differences between an interpolated image and its ground truth.
Original languageEnglish
Article number8
Number of pages18
JournalQuality and User Experience
Volume5
Early online date5 Sep 2020
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2020

Keywords

  • Visual quality assessment
  • Frame interpolation
  • Artefact amplification
  • Weighted error

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Subjective annotation for a frame interpolation benchmark using artefact amplification'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this