Papers › UGC-VQA: Benchmarking Blind Video Quality Assessment for User Generated Content

UGC-VQA: Benchmarking Blind Video Quality Assessment for User Generated Content

29 May 2020arXiv:2005.14354archive 2025-07-28

Zhengzhong Tu, Yilin Wang, Neil Birkbeck, Balu Adsumilli, Alan C. Bovik

Recent years have witnessed an explosion of user-generated content (UGC) videos shared and streamed over the Internet, thanks to the evolution of affordable and reliable consumer capture devices, and the tremendous popularity of social media platforms. Accordingly, there is a great need for accurate video quality assessment (VQA) models for UGC/consumer videos to monitor, control, and optimize this vast content. Blind quality prediction of in-the-wild videos is quite challenging, since the quality degradations of UGC content are unpredictable, complicated, and often commingled. Here we contribute to advancing the UGC-VQA problem by conducting a comprehensive evaluation of leading no-reference/blind VQA (BVQA) features and models on a fixed evaluation architecture, yielding new empirical insights on both subjective video quality studies and VQA model design. By employing a feature selection strategy on top of leading VQA model features, we are able to extract 60 of the 763 statistical features used by the leading models to create a new fusion-based BVQA model, which we dub the \textbf{VID}eo quality \textbf{EVAL}uator (VIDEVAL), that effectively balances the trade-off between VQA performance and efficiency. Our experimental results show that VIDEVAL achieves state-of-the-art performance at considerably lower computational cost than other leading models. Our study protocol also defines a reliable benchmark for the UGC-VQA problem, which we believe will facilitate further research on deep learning-based VQA modeling, as well as perceptually-optimized efficient UGC video processing, transcoding, and streaming. To promote reproducible research and public evaluation, an implementation of VIDEVAL has been made available online: \url{https://github.com/tu184044109/VIDEVAL_release}.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

tu184044109/VIDEVAL_release officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHub report
tu184044109/BVQA_Benchmark mentioned on GitHubpytorch report
vztu/BVQA_Benchmark mentioned on GitHubpytorch report
vztu/VIDEVAL mentioned on GitHub report
vztu/VIDEVAL_release mentioned on GitHub 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

BenchmarkingVideo Quality AssessmentVisual Question Answering (VQA)feature selection

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

TaskDatasetModelMetricValueRank at snapshotLeaderboardReport
Video Quality Assessment KoNViD-1k VIDEVAL PLCC 0.7803 #17 of 21 Archive leaderboard report
Video Quality Assessment LIVE-FB LSVQ VIDEVAL PLCC 0.783 #13 of 13 Archive leaderboard report
Video Quality Assessment LIVE-VQC VIDEVAL PLCC 0.7514 #18 of 20 Archive leaderboard report
Video Quality Assessment MSU NR VQA Database VIDEVAL KLCC 0.5414 #19 of 21 Archive leaderboard report
Video Quality Assessment MSU NR VQA Database VIDEVAL PLCC 0.7717 #19 of 21 Archive leaderboard report
Video Quality Assessment MSU NR VQA Database VIDEVAL SRCC 0.7286 #19 of 21 Archive leaderboard report
Video Quality Assessment MSU NR VQA Database VIDEVAL Type NR #19 of 21 Archive leaderboard report
Video Quality Assessment YouTube-UGC VIDEVAL PLCC 0.7733 #14 of 17 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.

Methods

Feature Selection

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