| Literature DB >> 27540505 |
Hou-Biao Li1, Jun-Yan Wang1, Hong-Xia Dou1.
Abstract
Restoring Poissonian noise images have drawn a lot of attention in recent years. There are many regularization methods to solve this problem and one of the most famous methods is the total variation model. In this paper, by adding a quadratic regularization on TGV regularization part, a new image restoration model is proposed based on second-order total generalized variation regularization. Then the split Bregman iteration algorithm was used to solve this new model. The experimental results show that the proposed model and algorithm can deal with Poisson image restoration problem well. What's more, the restoration model performance is significantly improved both in visual effect and objective evaluation indexes.Entities:
Keywords: Image restoration; Optimization problem; Poisson noise; Split Bregman iteration; Total generalized variation
Year: 2016 PMID: 27540505 PMCID: PMC4975743 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-2929-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Fig. 1The woman picture is compared with other method. a Original image; b degraded image; c the PIDAL model result; d the PID-Split method result; e the TGV method result; f the proposed model result. g–j The residual images
Summarized all of the experiment restoration results
| Method | SNR | PSNR | RelErr | SSIM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test1 | ||||
| PIDAL (Figueiredo and Bioucas-Dias | 25.33 | 30.30 | 0.054 | 0.904 |
| PID-Split (Liu and Huang | 25.18 | 30.16 | 0.055 | 0.917 |
| TGV | 25.31 | 30.32 | 0.053 | 0.908 |
| Proposed | 25.48 | 30.45 | 0.053 | 0.922 |
| Test2 | ||||
| PIDAL (Figueiredo and Bioucas-Dias | 21.17 | 25.03 | 0.087 | 0.828 |
| PID-Split (Liu and Huang | 21.38 | 25.36 | 0.084 | 0.837 |
| TGV | 21.24 | 25.10 | 0.086 | 0.835 |
| Proposed | 21.74 | 25.60 | 0.080 | 0.843 |
| Test3 | ||||
| PIDAL (Figueiredo and Bioucas-Dias | 21.50 | 27.87 | 0.0841 | 0.811 |
| PID-Split (Liu and Huang | 21.49 | 27.86 | 0.0357 | 0.811 |
| TGV | 20.64 | 27.01 | 0.092 | 0.801 |
| Proposed | 21.01 | 27.23 | 0.0803 | 0.820 |
Fig. 2The house picture is compared with other method. a Original image; b degraded image; c the PIDAL model result; d the PID-Split method result; e the TGV method result; f the proposed model result; g–j The result of partial enlarged pictures
Fig. 3The third experiment. a Original image; b degraded image; c the PIDAL model result; d the PID-Split method result; e the TGV method result; f the proposed model result; g–j The residual images
Fig. 4The fourth experiment. a Ground truth; b ground truth enlarge; c PID-Split method result; d PID-Split method enlarge; e PIDAL-Method result; f PIDAL-method enlarge; g Proposed method result; h proposed method enlarge