Analysis of Deep Image Quality Models
This work addresses the problem of understanding why deep networks exhibit human-like perceptual behavior for image quality assessment, which is incremental as it builds on existing models without introducing new methods.
The authors analyzed how pre-trained deep neural networks predict image quality, finding that models trained for supervised tasks like classification correlate better with human opinion than specialized methods like LPIPS, with some achieving state-of-the-art performance without extra refinement.
Subjective image quality measures based on deep neural networks are very related to models of visual neuroscience. This connection benefits engineering but, more interestingly, the freedom to optimize deep networks in different ways, make them an excellent tool to explore the principles behind visual perception (both human and artificial). Recently, a myriad of networks have been successfully optimized for many interesting visual tasks. Although these nets were not specifically designed to predict image quality or other psychophysics, they have shown surprising human-like behavior. The reasons for this remain unclear. In this work, we perform a thorough analysis of the perceptual properties of pre-trained nets (particularly their ability to predict image quality) by isolating different factors: the goal (the function), the data (learning environment), the architecture, and the readout: selected layer(s), fine-tuning of channel relevance, and use of statistical descriptors as opposed to plain readout of responses. Several conclusions can be drawn. All the models correlate better with human opinion than SSIM. More importantly, some of the nets are in pair of state-of-the-art with no extra refinement or perceptual information. Nets trained for supervised tasks such as classification correlate substantially better with humans than LPIPS (a net specifically tuned for image quality). Interestingly, self-supervised tasks such as jigsaw also perform better than LPIPS. Simpler architectures are better than very deep nets. In simpler nets, correlation with humans increases with depth as if deeper layers were closer to human judgement. This is not true in very deep nets. Consistently with reports on illusions and contrast sensitivity, small changes in the image environment does not make a big difference. Finally, the explored statistical descriptors and concatenations had no major impact.