These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36772550)

  • 1. Blind Video Quality Assessment for Ultra-High-Definition Video Based on Super-Resolution and Deep Reinforcement Learning.
    Ying Z; Pan D; Shi P
    Sensors (Basel); 2023 Jan; 23(3):. PubMed ID: 36772550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. UGC-VQA: Benchmarking Blind Video Quality Assessment for User Generated Content.
    Tu Z; Wang Y; Birkbeck N; Adsumilli B; Bovik AC
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2021; 30():4449-4464. PubMed ID: 33856995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Spatiotemporal Statistics for Video Quality Assessment.
    Xuelong Li ; Qun Guo ; Xiaoqiang Lu
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2016 Jul; 25(7):3329-3342. PubMed ID: 27187966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. ST-GREED: Space-Time Generalized Entropic Differences for Frame Rate Dependent Video Quality Prediction.
    Madhusudana PC; Birkbeck N; Wang Y; Adsumilli B; Bovik AC
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2021; 30():7446-7457. PubMed ID: 34449359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Objective Video Quality Assessment Combining Transfer Learning With CNN.
    Zhang Y; Gao X; He L; Lu W; He R
    IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst; 2020 Aug; 31(8):2716-2730. PubMed ID: 30736007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Multi-Dimensional Feature Fusion Network for No-Reference Quality Assessment of In-the-Wild Videos.
    Jiang J; Wang X; Li B; Tian M; Yao H
    Sensors (Basel); 2021 Aug; 21(16):. PubMed ID: 34450761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Video quality assessment using motion-compensated temporal filtering and manifold feature similarity.
    Song Y; Yu M; Jiang G; Shao F; Peng Z
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(4):e0175798. PubMed ID: 28445489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. No-Reference Video Quality Assessment Using Multi-Pooled, Saliency Weighted Deep Features and Decision Fusion.
    Varga D
    Sensors (Basel); 2022 Mar; 22(6):. PubMed ID: 35336380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Motion tuned spatio-temporal quality assessment of natural videos.
    Seshadrinathan K; Bovik AC
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2010 Feb; 19(2):335-50. PubMed ID: 19846374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Screen Content Video Quality Assessment: Subjective and Objective Study.
    Cheng S; Zeng H; Chen J; Hou J; Zhu J; Ma KK
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2020 Aug; PP():. PubMed ID: 32845839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A Dataset and Model for the Visual Quality Assessment of Inversely Tone-Mapped HDR Videos.
    Zhou F; Yuan S; Liang Z; Duan J; Qiu G
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2024; 33():366-381. PubMed ID: 38117622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Contrastive Self-Supervised Pre-Training for Video Quality Assessment.
    Chen P; Li L; Wu J; Dong W; Shi G
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2022; 31():458-471. PubMed ID: 34874856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Viewport-Based CNN: A Multi-Task Approach for Assessing 360° Video Quality.
    Xu M; Jiang L; Li C; Wang Z; Tao X
    IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell; 2022 Apr; 44(4):2198-2215. PubMed ID: 33017289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Subjective and Objective Audio-Visual Quality Assessment for User Generated Content.
    Cao Y; Min X; Sun W; Zhai G
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2023; 32():3847-3861. PubMed ID: 37428674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A Spatial-Temporal Video Quality Assessment Method via Comprehensive HVS Simulation.
    Zhang AX; Wang YG; Tang W; Li L; Kwong S
    IEEE Trans Cybern; 2023 Dec; PP():. PubMed ID: 38145521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Compressed Domain Deep Video Super-Resolution.
    Chen P; Yang W; Wang M; Sun L; Hu K; Wang S
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2021; 30():7156-7169. PubMed ID: 34370665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluating the role of content in subjective video quality assessment.
    Mirkovic M; Vrgovic P; Culibrk D; Stefanovic D; Anderla A
    ScientificWorldJournal; 2014; 2014():625219. PubMed ID: 24523643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Blind prediction of natural video quality.
    Saad MA; Bovik AC; Charrier C
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2014 Mar; 23(3):1352-65. PubMed ID: 24723532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Subjective and Objective Video Quality Assessment of 3D Synthesized Views With Texture/Depth Compression Distortion.
    Liu X; Zhang Y; Hu S; Kwong S; Kuo CC; Peng Q
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2015 Dec; 24(12):4847-61. PubMed ID: 26292342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Sparse Representation based Video Quality Assessment for Synthesized 3D Videos.
    Zhang Y; Zhang H; Yu M; Kwong S; Ho YS
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2019 Jul; ():. PubMed ID: 31369374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.