Dynamic Image Quality Evaluation via Adaptive Criteria

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing image quality evaluation systems lack the ability to adapt to individual user preferences and criteria, leading to inconsistent and indiscriminate assessments.

Innovation Solution

An information processing system that allows evaluation criteria to be dynamically adjusted based on user-specific evaluation results, enabling exclusion or relaxation of evaluation items and criteria according to user needs.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Stability of the object's composition

If uniform evaluation criteria are applied to all images, then evaluation consistency is improved, but adaptability to individual user preferences deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveevaluation consistencyVSAvoidadaptability to user preferences
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The evaluation system dynamically adjusts evaluation criteria based on user preferences and historical evaluation data. The processor modifies evaluation weights and thresholds in real-time according to individual user needs, transforming static uniform criteria into dynamic adaptive criteria that maintain consistency within user-specific contexts while adapting across different users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes evaluation parameters such as weights assigned to different image quality attributes and threshold values based on user preferences. By modifying these parameters dynamically, the system maintains evaluation consistency through structured parameter management while achieving adaptability to individual user requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Adaptability or versatility

If evaluation criteria are customized for each user, then adaptability to user preferences is improved, but evaluation consistency deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to user preferencesVSAvoidevaluation consistency
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements parameter changes by adjusting evaluation weights and thresholds based on user preferences while maintaining a structured framework. This allows customization for each user through parameter modification rather than complete criterion redesign, preserving evaluation consistency through systematic parameter management.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from user evaluations and preferences to continuously refine evaluation criteria. By incorporating feedback loops where user responses inform future evaluation adjustments, the system achieves both adaptability to individual users and consistency through learned patterns and standardized feedback processing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Measurement precision

If comprehensive evaluation items are used, then evaluation precision is improved, but device complexity deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveevaluation precisionVSAvoidevaluation system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system extracts and focuses on the most relevant evaluation items based on user preferences and image characteristics. By selecting only necessary evaluation dimensions rather than applying all possible criteria, the system maintains high evaluation precision for relevant attributes while reducing overall system complexity through selective item extraction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The evaluation system segments comprehensive evaluation into modular, independent evaluation items that can be selectively applied. This segmentation allows the system to maintain precision by evaluating only necessary aspects while reducing complexity through modular design that enables selective activation of evaluation components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentEP4530977A1Image quality evaluation according to actual usage
Publication Date: 2025.04.02 FUJIFILM BUSINESS INNOVATION CORP
  • EP4530977A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4530977A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4530977A1 patent drawingFigure 3~4

AI summary

An information processing system includes at least one processor configured to: obtain image data to be diagnosed; evaluate the image data on the basis of evaluation criteria for each of one or more evaluation items related to image quality; and allow an evaluation method based on the evaluation criteria to be changed according to an evaluation result in the evaluation of each of the evaluation items.