Classical Versus Deep Mirror-Symmetry Scoring: A Benchmark of Thirteen Methods

Abstract

Quantifying how mirror-symmetric an image is about a given axis (symmetry scoring) underpins applications from visual aesthetics to medical imaging, yet proposed scoring methods have never been compared on a common, statistically grounded protocol. We benchmark 13 scoring methods (9 collected from the literature; 4 introduced here) spanning from classical features to frozen deep features, across four single-axis and five multi-axis datasets under a reflection-exact protocol with a chance-anchored, significance-tested discrimination skill. Deep backbones perform best on single-axis and harder multi-axis protocols. However, a classical histogram-of-oriented-gradients (HOG) descriptor trails the best frozen-network readout by a small (but significant) margin, is not statistically separable from the runner-up (a CNN-filter measure), and runs $\sim$300$\times$ faster on CPU. Our results show that discrimination concentrates in mid-scale oriented features, where deep backbones peak at a low or mid stage, and HOG peaks at a mid cell size. Among existing methods, frozen deep features thus offer little over a tuned classical descriptor for measuring symmetry; whether task-trained deep scorers can do better remains open. We release the scorers and harness, in imgsym, an open toolkit for image symmetry detection and measurement.