Existing full-reference image quality assessment (FR-IQA) methods achieve high-precision evaluation by analysing feature differences between reference and distorted images. However, their performance is constrained by the quality of the reference image, which limits real-world applications where ideal reference sources are unavailable. Notably, the human visual system has the ability to accumulate visual memory, allowing image quality assessment on the basis of long-term memory storage. Inspired by this biological memory mechanism, we propose a memory-driven quality-aware framework (MQAF), which establishes a memory bank for storing distortion patterns and dynamically switches between dual-mode quality assessment strategies to reduce reliance on high-quality reference images. When reference images are available, MQAF obtains reference-guided quality scores by adaptively weighting reference information and comparing the distorted image with stored distortion patterns in the memory bank. When the reference image is absent, the framework relies on distortion patterns in the memory bank to infer image quality, enabling no-reference quality assessment (NR-IQA). The experimental results show that our method outperforms state-of-the-art approaches across multiple datasets while adapting to both no-reference and full-reference tasks.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Comparison of MQAF with existing IQA methods, highlighting the exceptional IQA ability of MQAF-R.
Fig. 2: The framework (MQAF) of our proposed method can adaptively select different modes based on the availability of reference images in the quality assessment process. When a reference image is available, the framework enters the reference mode, where the final quality score Q is obtained by computing reference matching and memory matching. When no reference image is available, the framework switches to the no-reference mode, where the final quality score Q is determined by matching with distortion patterns (memory units V ) stored in the memory bank.
Dataset
LIVE [ 36 ]
CSIQ [ 27 ]
TID2013 [ 37 ]
KADID-10K [ 38 ]
PIPAL [ 39 ]
Reference images
29
30
25
81
250
Distorted images
779
866
3,000
10,125
25,850
Distortion types
5
6
24
25
40
Image resolution
-
512 × 512
512 × 384
512 × 384
288 × 288
MOS range
[0, 100]
[0, 1]
[0, 9]
[1, 5]
[868, 1857]
TABLE I: Detailed information of the image quality assessment databases.
Type
Method
LIVE [ 36 ]
CSIQ [ 27 ]
TID2013 [ 37 ]
KADID-10K [ 38 ]
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
FR
PSNR
0.791
0.807
0.781
0.801
0.663
0.686
0.667
0.672
SSIM [ 24 ]
0.847
0.851
0.819
0.832
0.665
0.627
0.780
0.778
MS-SSIM [ 25 ]
0.886
0.903
0.864
0.879
0.785
0.729
0.835
0.834
VIF [ 26 ]
0.948
0.952
0.898
0.899
0.771
0.677
0.676
0.669
MAD [ 27 ]
0.904
0.907
0.934
0.932
0.803
0.773
0.829
0.827
TABLE II: Performance comparison of the proposed MQAF algorithm against state-of-the-art FR-IQA and NR-IQA algorithms on benchmark datasets. The best, second, and third results are bolded and highlighted in red , green , and blue , respectively. Additionally, MQAF-R presents the performance of our method in reference mode, while MQAF-NR shows its performance in no-reference mode.
Methods
PIPAL Validation [ 39 ]
PLCC
SRCC
PSNR
0.289
0.255
SSIM [ 24 ]
0.409
0.363
MS-SSIM [ 25 ]
0.566
0.491
FSIM [ 28 ]
0.562
0.468
VSI [ 29 ]
0.515
0.450
TABLE III: SRCC results of MQAF-R on the PIPAL dataset. The best results are shown in bold .
Method
Training Set: KADID-10K
LIVE
CSIQ
TID2013
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PSNR
0.872
0.0.876
0.796
0.806
0.702
0.639
WaDIQaM-FR [ 20 ]
0.837
0.883
-
-
0.741
0.698
RADN [ 56 ]
0.878
0.905
-
-
0.796
0.747
PieAPP [ 43 ]
0.910
0.918
0.890
0.897
0.831
0.844
TABLE IV: Comparison of cross-dataset performance on KADID-10K [ 38 ] dataset. The best results are highlighted in bold .
Method
LIVE
CSIQ
JP2K
JPEG
WN
GB
FF
WN
JPEG
JP2K
PN
GB
CC
PSNR
0.895
0.881
0.985
0.782
0.891
0.963
0.888
0.936
0.934
0.929
0.862
SSIM [ 24 ]
0.961
0.972
0.969
0.952
0.956
0.897
0.956
0.961
0.892
0.961
0.792
VIF [ 26 ]
0.969
0.984
0.985
0.972
0.965
0.958
0.971
0.967
0.951
0.975
0.935
GSMD [ 40 ]
0.968
0.973
0.974
0.957
0.942
0.944
0.963
0.965
0.939
0.959
0.935
FSIMc [ 28 ]
0.972
0.979
0.971
0.968
0.950
0.936
0.966
0.970
0.937
0.973
0.944
TABLE V: SROCC results for individual distortion types on the LIVE [ 36 ] and CSIQ [ 27 ] databases. The best result is shown in bold and the second-best result is underlined .
Dist. type
BRISQUE [ 59 ]
ILNIQE [ 60 ]
CORNIA [ 61 ]
HOSA [ 62 ]
WaDIQaM-NR [ 20 ]
DBCNN [ 19 ]
MetalQA [ 47 ]
† MQAF-NR (Ours)
† MQAF-R (Ours)
AGN
0.9356
0.8760
0.4465
0.7582
0.9080
0.7585
0.9473
0.9650
* 0.9694
ANC
0.8114
0.8159
0.1020
0.4670
0.8700
0.8423
0.9240
0.9450
0.9188
SCN
0.5457
0.9233
0.6697
0.6246
0.8802
0.7800
0.9534
0.9758
0.9726
MN
0.5852
0.5120
0.6096
0.5125
0.8065
0.4501
0.7277
0.8362
* 0.8831
HFN
0.8956
0.8685
0.8402
0.8285
0.9314
0.8192
0.9518
0.9509
* 0.9667
IN
0.6559
0.7551
0.3526
0.1889
0.8779
0.5798
0.8653
0.8384
0.8172
TABLE VI: SROCC value comparison in leave–one-distortion-out cross-validation on the TID2013 dataset. The best result is shown in bold , the second-best result is underlined , and † denotes the reference mode (MQAF-R) and no-reference mode model (MQAF-NR), whereas ∗ indicates the best results under the MQAF-R model.
NAME
PieAPP [ 43 ]
LPIPS [ 17 ]
DISTS [ 15 ]
PDL [ 32 ]
WaDIQaM-FR [ 20 ]
A-DISTS [ 16 ]
MACs / G
30.25
20.04
20.40
25.40
20.04
20.04
Params / M
68.38
14.71
16.02
20.02
14.72
14.71
Runtime / min
29.74
1.98
3.66
11.66
15.43
3.10
NAME
AHIQ [ 12 ]
DeepWSD [ 18 ]
TOPIQ [ 14 ]
DeepDC [ 63 ]
MQAF-R w/VGG16
MQAF-R w/ResNet50
MACs / G
1689.91
25.40
7.80
19.05
30.70
8.27
Params / M
133.39
20.02
32.35
26.54
16.29
28.22
TABLE VII: Comparison of computational complexity on different methods and backbone networks.
Method
LIVE
CSIQ
TID2013
KADID-10K
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
Memory-driven (w/o)
0.980
0.977
0.964
0.970
0.931
0.937
0.950
0.950
MQAF-R (Ours)
0.982
0.980
0.977
0.979
0.964
0.966
0.964
0.963
MQAF-NR (Ours)
0.984
0.980
0.971
0.972
0.963
0.960
0.962
0.958
TABLE VIII: Results of ablation results on four benchmark datasets. The best result is shown in bold .
Memory Units
λ
PLCC
SRCC
128
0.01
0.963
0.962
256
0.01
0.964
0.964
512
0.01
0.963
0.964
1024
0.01
0.962
0.962
2048
0.01
0.962
0.959
TABLE IX: Effect of the number of memory units on model performance on the TID2013 [ 37 ] dataset.
λ
Memory Units
PLCC
SRCC
0
256
0.963
0.962
0.001
256
0.964
0.964
0.005
256
0.963
0.963
0.01
256
0.960
0.963
0.05
256
0.963
0.964
0.1
256
0.964
0.966
TABLE X: Sensitivity analysis of the memory loss in Equation ( 9 ) hyperparameter λ on the TID2013 [ 37 ] dataset.
Fig. 3: Scatter plot of prediction results for different FR-IQA methods and our method (MQAF-R) on the KADID-10K [ 38 ] dataset. The vertical axis represents the ground truth values, whereas the horizontal axis represents the predicted values.
Fig. 4: Comparison of gMAD competition results on the TID2013 dataset among our proposed MQAF-R method, PieAPP [ 43 ] , WaDIQaM-FR [ 20 ] , and DISTS [ 15 ] is presented.
Traditional image quality assessment (IQA) methods rely on mean opinion scores (MOS), which are resource-intensive to collect and fail to provide interpretable, localized feedback on specific image distortions. We overcome these limitations by shifting from absolute quality prediction to a relational and directional assessment. Our approach utilizes a self-supervised synthetic distortion engine to generate training data, eliminating the need for manual annotation. A distortion prediction network is trained with an anti-symmetric objective to produce spatially-aware, disentangled maps that identify the type, intensity, and direction of distortions relative to a reference image. Subsequently, a scoring network is trained via contrastive learning on ordinally ranked image sets to predict a relational quality score. Our method provides a more granular and interpretable approach to IQA for the targeted optimization of image processing algorithms without requiring any human-labeled quality scores.
Fadeel Sher Khan, Long N. Le, Abhinau K. Venkataramanan +2
The University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX, USA · Samsung Research America Plano, TX, USA
No-Reference Image Quality Assessment (NR-IQA) aims to estimate perceptual quality without access to a reference image of pristine quality. Learning an NR-IQA model faces a fundamental bottleneck: its need for a large number of costly human perceptual labels. We propose SHAMISA, a non-contrastive self-supervised framework that learns from unlabeled distorted images by leveraging explicitly structured relational supervision. Unlike prior methods that impose rigid, binary similarity constraints, SHAMISA introduces implicit structural associations, defined as soft, controllable relations that are both distortion-aware and content-sensitive, inferred from synthetic metadata and intrinsic feature structure. A key innovation is our compositional distortion engine, which generates an uncountable family of degradations from continuous parameter spaces, grouped so that only one distortion factor varies at a time. This enables fine-grained control over representational similarity during training: images with shared distortion patterns are pulled together in the embedding space, while severity variations produce structured, predictable shifts. We integrate these insights via dual-source relation graphs that encode both known degradation profiles and emergent structural affinities to guide the learning process throughout training. A convolutional encoder is trained under this supervision and then frozen for inference, with quality prediction performed by a linear regressor on its features. Extensive experiments on synthetic, authentic, and cross-dataset NR-IQA benchmarks demonstrate that SHAMISA achieves strong overall performance with improved cross-dataset generalization and robustness, all without human quality annotations or contrastive losses.
Mahdi Naseri, Zhou Wang
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada
Current no-reference image quality assessment (NR-IQA) models for enhanced images often struggle to generalize, as they tend to overfit to the distinct patterns of specific enhancement algorithms rather than evaluating genuine perceptual quality. To address this issue, we propose a preference-guided debiasing framework for no-reference enhancement image quality assessment (EIQA). Specifically, we first learn a continuous enhancement-preference embedding space using supervised contrastive learning, where images generated by similar enhancement styles are encouraged to have closer representations. Based on this, we further estimate the enhancement-induced nuisance component contained in the raw quality representation and remove it before quality regression. In this way, the model is guided to focus on algorithm-invariant perceptual quality cues instead of enhancement-specific visual fingerprints. To facilitate stable optimization, we adopt a two-stage training strategy that first learns the enhancement-preference space and then performs debiased quality prediction. Extensive experiments on public EIQA benchmarks demonstrate that the proposed method effectively mitigates algorithm-induced representation bias and achieves superior robustness and cross-algorithm generalization compared with existing approaches.
Shiqi Gao, Kang Fu, Zitong Xu +4
Institute of Image Communication and Network Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China