Fix incorrect CLIP-IQA type hints

[wooseopkim]

What does this PR do?

Fixes #2951

Before submitting

• Was this discussed/agreed via a Github issue? (no need for typos and docs improvements)
  • I've just submitted CLIP-IQA functions are incorrectly typed #2951.
• Did you read the contributor guideline, Pull Request section?
• Did you make sure to update the docs?
  • Seems like it's covered by something called autoclass and autofunction
• Did you write any new necessary tests?
  • I don't think this requires a new test code. I thought utilizing TYPE_CHECKING would suffice, but that's not something I'm not willing to change.

PR review

Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed.
If we didn't discuss your PR in Github issues there's a high chance it will not be merged.

Did you have fun?

frfr

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://torchmetrics--2952.org.readthedocs.build/en/2952/

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 23.52941% with 13 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 32%. Comparing base (6ca9d13) to head (5d31fb7).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (6ca9d13) and HEAD (5d31fb7). Click for more details.

HEAD has 340 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (6ca9d13)	HEAD (5d31fb7)
torch2.0.1+cpu	21	3
python3.10	63	9
Windows	14	2
cpu	98	14
torch2.6.0+cpu	7	1
python3.12	21	3
macOS	21	3
torch2.6.0	7	1
torch2.0.1	14	2
Linux	63	9
torch2.4.1+cpu	14	2
python3.11	7	1
torch2.1.2+cpu	7	1
torch2.2.2+cpu	7	1
torch2.5.0+cpu	14	2
torch2.3.1+cpu	7	1
python3.9	7	1
gpu	2	0
unittest	2	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #2952     +/-   ##
========================================
- Coverage      70%     32%    -38%     
========================================
  Files         346     332     -14     
  Lines       19172   19011    -161     
========================================
- Hits        13428    6058   -7370     
- Misses       5744   12953   +7209     

[wooseopkim]

@SkafteNicki Thanks! I really feel what you're worried about, and I am not very satisfied with this approach either. I have several rough ideas right now but none of them seems to be good enough. I'd like to work on this a little bit more. How or where do you think we should continue this discussion?