Correct for Whom? Subjectivity and the Evaluation of Personalized Image Aesthetics Assessment Models

Abstract

The problem of image aesthetic quality assessment is surprisingly difficult to define precisely. Most early work attempted to estimate the average aesthetic rating of a group of observers, while some recent work has shifted to an approach based on few-shot personalization. In this paper, we connect few-shot personalization, via Immanuel Kant's concept of disinterested judgment, to an argument from feminist aesthetics about the biased tendencies of objective standards for subjective pleasures. To empirically investigate this philosophical debate, we introduce PR-AADB, a relabeling of the existing AADB dataset with labels for pairs of images, and measure how well the existing groundtruth predicts our new pairwise labels. We find, consistent with the feminist critique, that both the existing groundtruth and few-shot personalized predictions represent some users' preferences significantly better than others, but that it is difficult to predict when and for whom the existing groundtruth will be correct. We thus advise against using benchmark datasets to evaluate models for personalized IAQA, and recommend caution when attempting to account for subjective difference using machine learning more generally.