Papers › Image Quality Assessment: Unifying Structure and Texture Similarity
Image Quality Assessment: Unifying Structure and Texture Similarity
Keyan Ding, Kede Ma, Shiqi Wang, Eero P. Simoncelli
Objective measures of image quality generally operate by comparing pixels of a "degraded" image to those of the original. Relative to human observers, these measures are overly sensitive to resampling of texture regions (e.g., replacing one patch of grass with another). Here, we develop the first full-reference image quality model with explicit tolerance to texture resampling. Using a convolutional neural network, we construct an injective and differentiable function that transforms images to multi-scale overcomplete representations. We demonstrate empirically that the spatial averages of the feature maps in this representation capture texture appearance, in that they provide a set of sufficient statistical constraints to synthesize a wide variety of texture patterns. We then describe an image quality method that combines correlations of these spatial averages ("texture similarity") with correlations of the feature maps ("structure similarity"). The parameters of the proposed measure are jointly optimized to match human ratings of image quality, while minimizing the reported distances between subimages cropped from the same texture images. Experiments show that the optimized method explains human perceptual scores, both on conventional image quality databases, as well as on texture databases. The measure also offers competitive performance on related tasks such as texture classification and retrieval. Finally, we show that our method is relatively insensitive to geometric transformations (e.g., translation and dilation), without use of any specialized training or data augmentation. Code is available at https://github.com/dingkeyan93/DISTS.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2004.07728")
Code
Syntology Ran 0 of 2 code samples harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run.
By repository: official repository: 1 sample from 1 repository, 0 ran; community (archive-listed): 1 sample from 1 repository, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
2 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 2 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
913d396ed85be58b · report
43c6706154e54066 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Video Quality Assessment | MSU SR-QA Dataset | DISTS | KLCC | 0.42320 | #31 of 60 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Video Quality Assessment | MSU SR-QA Dataset | DISTS | PLCC | 0.55042 | #31 of 60 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Video Quality Assessment | MSU SR-QA Dataset | DISTS | SROCC | 0.53346 | #31 of 60 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Video Quality Assessment | MSU SR-QA Dataset | DISTS | Type | FR | #31 of 60 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
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