Evaluates the perceptual quality and text-image correspondence of AI-generated human images, while also benchmarking the ability of models to identify visible and semantically distorted human body parts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on AGHI-QA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports SRCC.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Aghi Qa Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-aghi-qa-eval)
---
name: aghi-qa-eval
description: Evaluates the perceptual quality and text-image correspondence of AI-generated human images, while also benchmarking the ability of models to identify visible and semantically distorted human body parts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on AGHI-QA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports SRCC.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2504.21308
bibtex_key: li2025aghiqa
confidence: high
---
# aghi-qa-eval
> AGHI-QA: A Subjective-Aligned Dataset and Metric for AI-Generated Human Images — Li et al. (2025) (arXiv:2504.21308, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the perceptual quality and text-image correspondence of AI-generated human images, while also benchmarking the ability of models to identify visible and semantically distorted human body parts.
## Datasets
- **AGHI-QA** — total 4000; splits: train (-1), test (-1)
## Metrics
- `SRCC` **(primary)** — range: [-1, 1]
- Spearman rank correlation coefficient measuring the monotonic relationship between predicted quality scores and human-annotated ground truth scores.
- `PLCC` — range: [-1, 1]
- Pearson linear correlation coefficient measuring the linear relationship between predicted and ground truth scores.
- `KRCC` — range: [-1, 1]
- Kendall rank-order correlation coefficient measuring the ordinal association between predicted and ground truth scores.
## Input / output format
**Input**: AI-generated human image (optionally cropped to human-centered region) and corresponding text prompt.
**Output**: Continuous quality scores for perceptual quality and text-image correspondence, or classification labels for visible/distorted human body parts.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_correlations(pred, gold):
# Rank both arrays
pred_rank = np.argsort(np.argsort(pred))
gold_rank = np.argsort(np.argsort(gold))
n = len(pred)
d_sq = np.sum((pred_rank - gold_rank) ** 2)
srcc = 1 - (6 * d_sq) / (n * (n**2 - 1))
# PLCC: linear regression then correlation
slope, intercept = np.polyfit(pred, gold, 1)
gold_pred = slope * pred + intercept
plcc = np.corrcoef(gold, gold_pred)[0, 1]
# KRCC
krcc, _ = kendalltau(gold, pred)
return srcc, plcc, krcc
```
## Common pitfalls
- Traditional no-reference IQA metrics (e.g., NIQE, BRISQUE) fail to capture semantic distortions in AI-generated human images.
- Zero-shot inference on vision-language models often underperforms compared to fine-tuned or adapted methods on this specific domain.
- Evaluating fine-grained distortions on complex parts like hands and faces is significantly harder than on limbs or torso, leading to skewed average scores.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Spearman rank correlation coefficient (SRCC), Pearson linear correlation coefficient (PLCC) and Kendall rank-order correlation coefficient (KRCC) are utilized for evaluating the scoring ability of each model. During evaluation, we split the data set into training set and testing set with a ratio of 0.8 and 0.2. We randomly split the data set five times and report the average results.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{li2025aghiqa,
title={AGHI-QA: A Subjective-Aligned Dataset and Metric for AI-Generated Human Images},
author={Li et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2504.21308}
}
```
- arXiv: 2504.21308