Advancing Comprehensive Aesthetic Insight with Multi-Scale Text-Guided Self-Supervised Learning
Résumé fourni par la source
Image Aesthetic Assessment (IAA) is a vital and intricate task that entails analyzing and assessing an image's aesthetic values, and identifying its highlights and areas for improvement. Traditional methods of IAA often concentrate on a single aesthetic task and suffer from inadequate labeled datasets, thus impairing in-depth aesthetic comprehension. Despite efforts to overcome this challenge through the application of Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs), such models remain underdeveloped for IAA purposes. To address this, we propose a comprehensive aesthetic MLLM capable of nuanced aesthetic insight. Central to our approach is an innovative multi-scale text-guided self-supervised learning technique. This technique features a multi-scale feature alignment module and capitalizes on a wealth of unlabeled data in a self-supervised manner to structurally and functionally enhance aesthetic ability. The empirical evidence indicates that accompanied with extensive instruct-tuning, our model sets new state-of-the-art benchmarks across multiple tasks, including aesthetic scoring, aesthetic commenting, and personalized image aesthetic assessment. Remarkably, it also demonstrates zero-shot learning capabilities in the emerging task of aesthetic suggesting. Furthermore, for personalized image aesthetic assessment, we harness the potential of in-context learning and showcase its inherent advantages.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Advancing Comprehensive Aesthetic Insight with Multi-Scale Text-Guided Self-Supervised Learning
- Date Crossref
- 11/04/2025
- Éditeur
- Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.