Papers › Considering user agreement in learning to predict the aesthetic quality

Considering user agreement in learning to predict the aesthetic quality

13 Oct 2021arXiv:2110.06956archive 2025-07-28

Suiyi Ling, Andreas Pastor, Junle Wang, Patrick Le Callet

How to robustly rank the aesthetic quality of given images has been a long-standing ill-posed topic. Such challenge stems mainly from the diverse subjective opinions of different observers about the varied types of content. There is a growing interest in estimating the user agreement by considering the standard deviation of the scores, instead of only predicting the mean aesthetic opinion score. Nevertheless, when comparing a pair of contents, few studies consider how confident are we regarding the difference in the aesthetic scores. In this paper, we thus propose (1) a re-adapted multi-task attention network to predict both the mean opinion score and the standard deviation in an end-to-end manner; (2) a brand-new confidence interval ranking loss that encourages the model to focus on image-pairs that are less certain about the difference of their aesthetic scores. With such loss, the model is encouraged to learn the uncertainty of the content that is relevant to the diversity of observers' opinions, i.e., user disagreement. Extensive experiments have demonstrated that the proposed multi-task aesthetic model achieves state-of-the-art performance on two different types of aesthetic datasets, i.e., AVA and TMGA.

PaperPDFCode

Code

tencent/censeoqoe mentioned on GitHubpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Diversity

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections