Research on AIGC empowering digital cultural and creative design style transfer and diversified generation methods

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Style transfer experiment evaluation results

Style transfer	Method	PSNR/dB	MSE	MS-SSIM/dB	Per-pixel acc
Original image→cartoon style	AdaIN	20.304	87.851	0.871	0.040
	SANet	19.801	85.228	0.919	0.041
	StyTr2	20.181	88.609	0.921	0.051
	AdaAttN	20.436	87.892	0.887	0.064
	CycleGAN	19.778	90.999	0.898	0.067
	Ours	21.293	82.678	0.939	0.071
Original image→oil painting style	AdaIN	17.841	84.445	0.836	0.576
	SANet	17.477	84.234	0.832	0.477
	StyTr2	17.583	83.689	0.843	0.524
	AdaAttN	17.552	83.709	0.842	0.608
	CycleGAN	17.635	83.275	0.838	0.419
	Ours	17.857	81.808	0.854	0.723
Original image→new Chinese style	AdaIN	22.882	73.425	0.951	0.088
	SANet	23.214	72.737	0.946	0.106
	StyTr2	22.833	72.887	0.959	0.116
	AdaAttN	22.874	74.443	0.941	0.155
	CycleGAN	22.956	74.198	0.955	0.142
	Ours	24.306	71.243	0.962	0.179

Application of evaluation index weight synthetic distribution in improved CycleGAN

	Primary index	Weight	Secondary index	Weight	Synthetic weight
Style transfer effect evaluation system	Image quality (A)	0.3758	Image fidelity (A1)	0.1274	0.0479
			Detail accuracy (A2)	0.1820	0.0684
			Image diversity (A3)	0.1136	0.0427
			Image expression (A4)	0.1538	0.0578
			Image innovation (A5)	0.1243	0.0467
			Image art (A6)	0.1548	0.0582
	Image practicality (A7)	0.1441	0.0542
	Style simulation (B)	0.3815	Style transfer coordination (B1)	0.2639	0.1007
			Style transfer speciality (B2)	0.2213	0.0844
			Style transfer applicability (B3)	0.2847	0.1086
			Style fusion rationality (B4)	0.2301	0.0878
	Connotation expression (C)	0.2427	Connotation expression form (C1)	0.1745	0.0423
			Connotation art (C2)	0.2942	0.0714
			Cultural expression (C3)	0.2736	0.0664
			Historical expression (C4)	0.2577	0.0625

Application evaluation index system of improved CycleGAN model

	Primary index	Secondary index
Style transfer effect evaluation system	Image quality (A)	Image fidelity (A1)
		Detail accuracy (A2)
		Image diversity (A3)
		Image expression (A4)
		Image innovation (A5)
		Image art (A6)
		Image practicality (A7)
	Style simulation (B)	Style transfer coordination (B1)
		Style transfer speciality (B2)
		Style transfer applicability (B3)
		Style fusion rationality (B4)
	Connotation expression (C)	Connotation expression form (C1)
		Connotation art (C2)
		Cultural expression (C3)
		Historical expression (C4)

Weight calculation of application evaluation score in improved CycleGAN

Primary index	Secondary index	Synthetic weight	Experimental participant
			1	2	3	4	5	6
Image quality (A)	A1	0.0479	9	8	9	8	8	9
	A2	0.0684	9	8	9	9	8	8
	A3	0.0427	8	8	9	8	9	9
	A4	0.0578	9	9	9	9	9	8
	A5	0.0467	10	10	9	10	9	9
	A6	0.0582	9	9	10	10	9	8
	A7	0.0542	10	10	10	10	9	10
Style simulation (B)	B1	0.1007	10	9	10	8	8	8
	B2	0.0844	9	10	9	8	8	8
	B3	0.1086	9	9	9	9	8	9
	B4	0.0878	9	10	9	10	8	9
Connotation expression (C)	C1	0.0423	8	9	10	8	9	9
	C2	0.0714	9	8	8	10	9	9
	C3	0.0664	9	10	8	9	9	9
	C4	0.0625	9	8	9	10	9	9
Decimal score			9.1166	9.0466	9.1176	9.0628	8.5022	8.6847
Centesimal score			91.17	90.47	91.18	90.63	85.02	86.85
Overall evaluation average score			89.22