Abstract

While it is nearly effortless for humans to quickly assess the perceptual similarity between two images, the underlying processes are thought to be quite complex. Despite this, the most widely used perceptual metrics today, such as PSNR and SSIM, are simple, shallow functions, and fail to account for many nuances of human perception. Recently, the deep learning community has found that features of the VGG network trained on ImageNet classification has been remarkably useful as a training loss for image synthesis. But how perceptual are these so-called "perceptual losses"? What elements are critical for their success? To answer these questions, we introduce a new dataset of human perceptual similarity judgments. We systematically evaluate deep features across different architectures and tasks and compare them with classic metrics. We find that deep features outperform all previous metrics by large margins on our dataset. More surprisingly, this result is not restricted to ImageNet-trained VGG features, but holds across different deep architectures and levels of supervision (supervised, self-supervised, or even unsupervised). Our results suggest that perceptual similarity is an emergent property shared across deep visual representations.

Keywords

PerceptionArtificial intelligenceMetric (unit)Similarity (geometry)Computer scienceDeep learningProperty (philosophy)Machine learningVisual perceptionPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)PsychologyEngineering

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Publication Info

Year
2018
Type
preprint
Pages
586-595
Citations
10763
Access
Closed

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

10763
OpenAlex
1991
Influential
9641
CrossRef

Cite This

Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, Alexei A. Efros et al. (2018). The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metric. 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 586-595. https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr.2018.00068

Identifiers

DOI
10.1109/cvpr.2018.00068
arXiv
1801.03924

Data Quality

Data completeness: 84%