4.7 Article

Underwater Image Quality Assessment: Subjective and Objective Methods

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MULTIMEDIA
Volume 24, Issue -, Pages 1980-1989

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TMM.2021.3074825

Keywords

Image enhancement; Measurement; Histograms; Image color analysis; Image quality; Image restoration; Benchmark testing; Underwater image; image quality assessment; perception experiment; statistical analysis; objective metric

Funding

  1. Foundation for High-level Talents in Higher Education of Guangdong Province [2017KTSCX095, 2016KQNCX075]
  2. General Program of Technology Project of Guangzhou [201707010221]
  3. Lifting Project of Guangzhou Youth Talent
  4. Guangdong basic and applied basic research foundation [2020A1515110958]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper investigates the performance of five popular enhancement algorithms for underwater images and analyzes their impact on perceptual quality. It also evaluates the visual quality objectively, aiming to develop objective metrics for automatic assessment of underwater image enhancement quality.
Underwater image enhancement plays a critical role in marine industry. Various algorithms are applied to enhance underwater images, but their performance in terms of perceptual quality has been little studied. In this paper, we investigate five popular enhancement algorithms and their output image quality. To this end, we have created a benchmark, including images enhanced by different algorithms and ground truth image quality obtained by human perception experiments. We statistically analyse the impact of various enhancement algorithms on the perceived quality of underwater images. Also, the visual quality provided by these algorithms is evaluated objectively, aiming to inform the development of objective metrics for automatic assessment of the quality for underwater image enhancement. The image quality benchmark and its objective metric are made publicly available.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available