Papers
arxiv:1604.03605

What do different evaluation metrics tell us about saliency models?

Published on Apr 6, 2017
Authors:
,
,
,
,

Abstract

How best to evaluate a saliency model's ability to predict where humans look in images is an open research question. The choice of evaluation metric depends on how saliency is defined and how the ground truth is represented. Metrics differ in how they rank saliency models, and this results from how false positives and false negatives are treated, whether viewing biases are accounted for, whether spatial deviations are factored in, and how the saliency maps are pre-processed. In this paper, we provide an analysis of 8 different evaluation metrics and their properties. With the help of systematic experiments and visualizations of metric computations, we add interpretability to saliency scores and more transparency to the evaluation of saliency models. Building off the differences in metric properties and behaviors, we make recommendations for metric selections under specific assumptions and for specific applications.

Community

Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 1604.03605
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/1604.03605 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/1604.03605 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/1604.03605 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.