Organizations: Victoria University of Wellington · The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou) · University of Cambridge · University of New South Wales
Blind 360°image quality assessment (IQA) aims to predict perceptual quality for panoramic images without a pristine reference. Unlike conventional planar images, 360°content in immersive environments restricts viewers to a limited viewport at any moment, making viewing behaviors critical to quality perception. Although existing scanpath-based approaches have attempted to model viewing behaviors by approximating the human view-then-rate paradigm, they treat scanpath generation and quality assessment as separate steps, preventing end-to-end optimization and task-aligned exploration. To address this limitation, we propose RL-ScanIQA, a reinforcement-learned framework for blind 360°IQA. RL-ScanIQA optimize a PPO-trained scanpath policy and a quality assessor, where the policy receives quality-driven feedback to learn task-relevant viewing strategies. To improve training stability and prevent mode collapse, we design multi-level rewards, including scanpath diversity and equator-biased priors. We further boost cross-dataset robustness using distortion-space augmentation together with rank-consistent losses that preserve intra-image and inter-image quality orderings. Extensive experiments on three benchmarks show that RL-ScanIQA achieves superior in-dataset performance and cross-dataset generalization. Codes are available at https://github.com/wangyuji1/RLScanIQA.git.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Comparison of previous works and ours. a : Previous works train the scanpath generator and quality assessor independently, typically with human scanpath supervision. b : Our method requires no human scanpath and jointly optimizes these two modules end-to-end with a reinforcement learning policy.
Figure 2: Overview of RL-ScanIQA: the scanpath generator is trained with PPO policy, sampling K diverse scanpaths. The quality assessor evaluates each scanpath and produces the final quality score.
Figure 3: Rewards: multi-level rewards are designed in our RL policy update. (More details and code in Supplementary Material)
Figure 4: Cross-Domain Enhancement: the quality assessor module is trained using multiple losses with distortion-space augmentation. (More details and code in Supplementary Material)
Method
JUFE
OIQA
CVIQD
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
Full-reference
SSIM [ 64 ]
0.027
0.011
0.298
0.314
0.668
0.705
VSI [ 75 ]
0.045
0.053
0.398
0.422
0.921
0.935
WS-PSNR [ 58 ]
0.027
0.081
0.375
0.318
0.778
0.812
LPIPS [ 76 ]
0.085
0.061
0.607
0.594
0.822
0.830
S-SSIM [ 3 ]
0.013
0.076
0.607
0.594
0.822
0.830
Table 1: In-dataset experiment results. The methods in the first and second sections are full-reference and blind, respectively. Learning-based methods are retrained on the designated training split to ensure fair comparison. Handcrafted and LLM-based methods are applied directly to ERP images without training. Best results are in bold . The second best is underlined .
Method
Train: CVIQD Test: OIQA / JUFE
Train: JUFE Test: CVIQD / OIQA
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
MC360IQA [ 57 ]
0.765 / 0.432
0.827 / 0.615
0.275 / 0.317
0.311 / 0.459
VGCN [ 66 ]
0.481 / 0.423
0.530 / 0.481
0.753 / 0.679
0.705 / 0.741
AHGCN [ 13 ]
0.501 / 0.443
0.695 / 0.527
0.601 / 0.711
0.611 / 0.498
Assessor360 [ 65 ]
0.853 / 0.632
0.887 / 0.749
0.617 / 0.724
0.405 / 0.499
GSR-X [ 55 ]
0.804 / 0.765
0.831 / 0.694
0.782 / 0.732
0.733 / 0.611
Table 2: Cross-dataset experiment results. Best results are in bold . The second best is underlined .
Figure 5: Sampled discrete viewport sequences. We visualize a representative scanpath (T=7) for each image and show the MOS and our predicted quality score below it.
Figure 6: Learned heatmaps: heatmaps aggregated from 15 scanpaths. Left : High quality images (MOS=64.67, 65.16) show uniform exploration. Right : Low quality images (MOS=16.15, 16.15) exhibit focused attention on degraded regions.
Method
SRCC
PLCC
w/ Human GT Scanpaths
0.724
0.752
w/o Joint Training
0.651
0.783
Main Model
0.816
0.902
Table 3: Ablation study on the impact of scanpath generator and training paradigm on JUFE [ 12 ] dataset.
Figure 7: Ablation Study: Impact of the number of scanpaths (K) and the length of a scanpath (T).
Method
CVIQD
OIQA
JUFE
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
w/o SER
0.952
0.960
0.903
0.942
0.754
0.766
w/o SDR
0.946
0.958
0.897
0.946
0.731
0.755
w/o TPR
0.921
0.933
0.874
0.916
0.720
0.771
Main Model
0.968
0.977
0.941
0.967
0.816
0.902
Table 4: Ablation study on multiple reward components.
Method
Train: CVIQD Test: OIQA / JUFE
Train: JUFE Test: CVIQD / OIQA
SRCC
PLCC
SRCC
PLCC
w/o Aug.
0.782 / 0.774
0.825 / 0.701
0.664 / 0.703
0.663 / 0.702
Main Model
0.901 / 0.800
0.913 / 0.822
0.771 / 0.755
0.802 / 0.833
Table 5: Ablation study on distortion-space augmentation