Paper detail

Learning image quality assessment by reinforcing task amenable data selection

In this paper, we consider a type of image quality assessment as a task-specific measurement, which can be used to select images that are more amenable to a given target task, such as image classification or segmentation. We propose to train simultaneously two neural networks for image selection and a target task using reinforcement learning. A controller network learns an image selection policy by maximising an accumulated reward based on the target task performance on the controller-selected validation set, whilst the target task predictor is optimised using the training set. The trained controller is therefore able to reject those images that lead to poor accuracy in the target task. In this work, we show that the controller-predicted image quality can be significantly different from the task-specific image quality labels that are manually defined by humans. Furthermore, we demonstrate that it is possible to learn effective image quality assessment without using a ``clean'' validation set, thereby avoiding the requirement for human labelling of images with respect to their amenability for the task. Using $6712$, labelled and segmented, clinical ultrasound images from $259$ patients, experimental results on holdout data show that the proposed image quality assessment achieved a mean classification accuracy of $0.94\pm0.01$ and a mean segmentation Dice of $0.89\pm0.02$, by discarding $5\%$ and $15\%$ of the acquired images, respectively. The significantly improved performance was observed for both tested tasks, compared with the respective $0.90\pm0.01$ and $0.82\pm0.02$ from networks without considering task amenability. This enables image quality feedback during real-time ultrasound acquisition among many other medical imaging applications.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.