Skip to main content
Log in

Perceptual image quality assessment metric using mutual information of Gabor features

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Science China Information Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A good objective metric of image quality assessment (IQA) should be consistent with the subjective judgment of human beings. In this paper, a four-stage perceptual approach for full reference IQA is presented. In the first stage, the visual features are extracted by 2-D Gabor filter that has the excellent performance of modeling the receptive fields of simple cells in the primary visual cortex. Then in the second stage, the extracted features are post-processed by the divisive normalization transform to reflect the nonlinear mechanisms in human visual systems. In the third stage, mutual information between the visual features of the reference and distorted images is employed to measure the visual quality. And in the last pooling stage, the mutual information is converted to the final objective quality score. Experimental results show that the proposed metic has a high correlation with the subjective assessment and outperforms other state-of-the-art metrics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wang Z, Bovik A C. Mean squared error: love it or leave it?-A new look at signal fidelity measures. IEEE Signal Process Mag, 2009, 1: 98–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sheikh H R, Bovik A C, Veciana G. An information fidelity criterion for image quality assessment using natural scene statistics. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2005, 12: 2117–2128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Karam L J, Ebrahimi T, Hemami S S, et al. Introduction to the issue on visual media quality assessment. IEEE J Sel Top Signal Process, 2009, 3: 189–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Liu H, Heynderickx I. Visual attention in objective image quality assessment: based on eye-tracking data. IEEE Trans Circ Syst Video Technol, 2011, 1: 971–982

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ferzli R, Karam L J. A no-reference objective image sharpness metric based on the notion of just noticeable blur (JNB). IEEE Trans Image Process, 2009, 4: 717–728

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Ma L, Li S N, Zhang F, et al. Reduced-reference image quality assessment using reorganized DCT-based image representation. IEEE Trans Multimedia, 2011, 4: 824–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sheikh H R, Sabir M F, Bovik A C. A statistical evaluation of recent full reference image quality assessment algorithms. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2006, 11: 3440–3451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wang Z, Bovik A C. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2004, 4: 600–612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Moorthy A K, Bovik A C. Visual importance pooling for image quality assessment. IEEE J Sel Top Signal Process, 2009, 2: 193–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gao X B, Lu W, Tao D C, et al. Image quality assessment based on multiscale geometric analysis. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2009, 7: 1409–1423

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Rao D V, Reddy L P. Contrast weighted perceptual structural similarity index for image quality assessment. J Electron Imag, 2010, 1: 011003-1–9

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wang Z, Li Q. Information content weighting for perceptual image quality assessment. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2011, 5: 1185–1198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sampat M P, Wang Z, Gupta S, et al. Complex wavelet structural similarity: a new image similarity index. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2009, 11: 2385–2401

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Shnayderman A, Gusev A, Eskicioglu A M. An SVD-based grayscale image quality measure for local and global assessment. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2006, 2: 422–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sheikh H R, Bovik A C. Image information and visual quality. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2006, 2: 430–444

    Google Scholar 

  16. Daugman J G. Uncertainty relation for resolution in space, spatial frequency, and orientation optimized by two-dimensional visual cortical filters. J Opt Soc Am A-Opt Image Sci, 1985, 7: 1160–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. David J F. Relation between the statistics of the natural images and the response properties of the cortical cells. J Opt Soc Am A-Opt Image Sci, 1987, 12: 2379–2394

    Google Scholar 

  18. Valois R L, Albrecht D G, Thorell L G. The orientation and direction selectivity of cells in macaque visual cortex. Vision Res, 1982, 5: 545–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Grigorescu S E, Petkov N, Kruizinga P. Comparison of texture features based on Gabor filters. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2002, 10: 1160–1167

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Schwartz O, Simoncelli E P. Natural signal statistics and sensory gain control. Nat Neurosci, 2001, 8: 819–825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Malo J, Epifanio I, Navarro R, et al. Non-linear image representation for efficient perceptual coding. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2006, 1: 68–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Li Q, Wang Z. Reduced-reference image quality assessment using divisive normalization-based image representation. IEEE J Sel Top Signal Process, 2009, 2: 202–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Zoran D, Weiss Y. The “tree-dependent components” of natural images are edge filters. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst, 2009, 22: 2340–2348

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pollen D A, Ronner S F. Phase relationships between adjacent simple cells in the visual cortex. Science, 1981, 4501: 1409–1411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Thevenaz P, Unser M. Optimization of mutual information for multiresolution image registration. IEEE Trans Image Process, 2000, 12: 2083–2099

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Maes F, Collignon A, Vandermeulen D, et al. Multi-modality image registration by maximization of mutual information. IEEE Trans Med Imag, 1997, 2: 187–198

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yong Ding.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ding, Y., Zhang, Y., Wang, X. et al. Perceptual image quality assessment metric using mutual information of Gabor features. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 57, 1–9 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-013-4881-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-013-4881-y

Keywords

Navigation