|
|
|
Evaluating generative AI for vision (GenAI vision) is an evolving field, but here are some key approaches to consider:
Human Evaluation:
Subjective Assessment: Since "good" for a generated image can be subjective, human evaluation is crucial. Recruit users to rate the outputs on factors like:
Photorealism: How realistic and detailed does the image appear?
Relevance: Does the image accurately reflect the prompt or concept?
Style: Does the image adhere to the desired artistic style (e.g., impressionistic, photorealistic)?
Creativity: Does the image go beyond a basic representation and showcase originality?
Diversity: Does the model generate a variety of outputs for the same prompt, avoiding monotony?
Platforms for Human Evaluation:
Tools like Adobe GenLens [1] or Replicate Zoo [2] can streamline the human evaluation process by providing interfaces for collecting user ratings on generated images.
Automatic Metrics:
Limited Effectiveness: While helpful in other domains, traditional metrics like Mean Squared Error (MSE) or Structural Similarity Index (SSIM) may not fully capture the quality of generated images. They focus on pixel-level differences which might not reflect the high-level content or style.
Emerging Techniques:
Frechet Inception Distance (FID): This metric attempts to assess the quality of generated images by measuring the distance between the distribution of features extracted from real images and the generated ones.
Holistic Evaluation:
Combine Metrics: Don't rely solely on a single metric. Combine human evaluation with FID or other emerging metrics for a more comprehensive assessment.
Consider Use Case: Tailor the evaluation to your specific application. For example, evaluating medical imaging AI would require metrics focused on anatomical accuracy, while evaluating an AI for generating artistic images might prioritize aesthetics and creativity.
|