REVIEW 2 cited by
3DGCQA: A Quality Assessment Database for 3D AI-Generated Contents
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Although 3D generated content (3DGC) offers advantages in reducing production costs and accelerating design timelines, its quality often falls short when compared to 3D professionally generated content. Common quality issues frequently affect 3DGC, highlighting the importance of timely and effective quality assessment. Such evaluations not only ensure a higher standard of 3DGCs for end-users but also provide critical insights for advancing generative technologies. To address existing gaps in this domain, this paper introduces a novel 3DGC quality assessment dataset, 3DGCQA, built using 7 representative Text-to-3D generation methods. During the dataset's construction, 50 fixed prompts are utilized to generate contents across all methods, resulting in the creation of 313 textured meshes that constitute the 3DGCQA dataset. The visualization intuitively reveals the presence of 6 common distortion categories in the generated 3DGCs. To further explore the quality of the 3DGCs, subjective quality assessment is conducted by evaluators, whose ratings reveal significant variation in quality across different generation methods. Additionally, several objective quality assessment algorithms are tested on the 3DGCQA dataset. The results expose limitations in the performance of existing algorithms and underscore the need for developing more specialized quality assessment methods. To provide a valuable resource for future research and development in 3D content generation and quality assessment, the dataset has been open-sourced in https://github.com/zyj-2000/3DGCQA.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Who is a Better Talker: Subjective and Objective Quality Assessment for AI-Generated Talking Heads
A new large dataset and the FSCD model improve automated quality scoring of AI-generated talking-head videos, beating 15 baselines in correlation with human ratings.
-
Point Cloud Compression and Objective Quality Assessment: A Survey
A survey of point cloud compression and objective quality assessment that benchmarks representative methods on standard datasets and distills design insights.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.