Researcher profile

Franz Götz-Hahn

Franz Götz-Hahn contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
4topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Critical analysis on the reproducibility of visual quality assessment using deep features

Data used to train supervised machine learning models are commonly split into independent training, validation, and test sets. This paper illustrates that complex data leakage cases have occurred in the no-reference image and video quality assessment literature. Recently, papers in several journals reported performance results well above the best in the field. However, our analysis shows that information from the test set was inappropriately used in the training process in different ways and that the claimed performance results cannot be achieved. When correcting for the data leakage, the performances of the approaches drop even below the state-of-the-art by a large margin. Additionally, we investigate end-to-end variations to the discussed approaches, which do not improve upon the original.

preprint2021arXiv

KonVid-150k: A Dataset for No-Reference Video Quality Assessment of Videos in-the-Wild

Video quality assessment (VQA) methods focus on particular degradation types, usually artificially induced on a small set of reference videos. Hence, most traditional VQA methods under-perform in-the-wild. Deep learning approaches have had limited success due to the small size and diversity of existing VQA datasets, either artificial or authentically distorted. We introduce a new in-the-wild VQA dataset that is substantially larger and diverse: KonVid-150k. It consists of a coarsely annotated set of 153,841 videos having five quality ratings each, and 1,596 videos with a minimum of 89 ratings each. Additionally, we propose new efficient VQA approaches (MLSP-VQA) relying on multi-level spatially pooled deep-features (MLSP). They are exceptionally well suited for training at scale, compared to deep transfer learning approaches. Our best method, MLSP-VQA-FF, improves the Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient (SRCC) performance metric on the commonly used KoNViD-1k in-the-wild benchmark dataset to 0.82. It surpasses the best existing deep-learning model (0.80 SRCC) and hand-crafted feature-based method (0.78 SRCC). We further investigate how alternative approaches perform under different levels of label noise, and dataset size, showing that MLSP-VQA-FF is the overall best method for videos in-the-wild. Finally, we show that the MLSP-VQA models trained on KonVid-150k sets the new state-of-the-art for cross-test performance on KoNViD-1k, LIVE-VQC, and LIVE-Qualcomm with a 0.83, 0.75, and 0.64 SRCC, respectively. For both KoNViD-1k and LIVE-VQC this inter-dataset testing outperforms intra-dataset experiments, showing excellent generalization.

preprint2020arXiv

Comment on "No-Reference Video Quality Assessment Based on the Temporal Pooling of Deep Features"

In Neural Processing Letters 50,3 (2019) a machine learning approach to blind video quality assessment was proposed. It is based on temporal pooling of features of video frames, taken from the last pooling layer of deep convolutional neural networks. The method was validated on two established benchmark datasets and gave results far better than the previous state-of-the-art. In this letter we report the results from our careful reimplementations. The performance results, claimed in the paper, cannot be reached, and are even below the state-of-the-art by a large margin. We show that the originally reported wrong performance results are a consequence of two cases of data leakage. Information from outside the training dataset was used in the fine-tuning stage and in the model evaluation.