2018
DOI: 10.1109/tip.2018.2865089
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling the Perceptual Quality of Immersive Images Rendered on Head Mounted Displays: Resolution and Compression

Abstract: We develop a model that expresses the joint impact of spatial resolution s and JPEG compression quality factor qf on immersive image quality. The model is expressed as the product of optimized exponential functions of these factors. The model is tested on a subjective database of immersive image contents rendered on a head mounted display (HMD). High Pearson correlation and Spearman correlation (> 0.95) and small relative root mean squared error (< 5.6%) are achieved between the model predictions and the subje… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
37
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
37
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The use of a second database is very important for model validation and generalization analysis. We tried to use two different databases [19,20] to perform a cross-database validation. Unfortunately, we discovered some inconsistencies in terms of subjective scores that could not be explained.…”
Section: Data and Implementationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of a second database is very important for model validation and generalization analysis. We tried to use two different databases [19,20] to perform a cross-database validation. Unfortunately, we discovered some inconsistencies in terms of subjective scores that could not be explained.…”
Section: Data and Implementationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Datasets, such as Abreu et al [DA17], Sitzman et al [Sit18], Gutierrez et al [Gut18], were presented to study how the users visualize 360 • images by tracking their attention, head movement and eye movement. For 360 • image visual quality assessment, the most popular dataset are Huang et al [Hua18], CVIQD [Sun17], CVIQD2018 [Sun18] and OIQA [Dua18]. SUN360 [oTed] and 3D60 [oITed] (which is a mix of the SunCG [Soned] and SceneNet [McCed] datasets) and 360SP [Cha18] are interesting benchmarks too.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After each stimulus, each participant verbally gave a rating score with the grade scale from 1 (bad) to 5 (excellent) which was recorded by an assistant. Similar to [18], the viewing duration of each stimulus was 20 seconds for rating and 5 seconds for a break. To avoid the negative impacts of fatigue and boredom, each participant rated only 36 among 72 stimuli with the total rating duration of approximately 15 minutes.…”
Section: Experiments Settingsmentioning
confidence: 99%