Advanced Concepts in Constrained Least Squares Filtering for Image Restoration

Image restoration is a critical process in digital image processing, aimed at recovering the original image from a degraded version. One of the advanced methods used for this purpose is Constrained Least Squares Filtering (CLSF). Unlike the Wiener filter, CLSF incorporates additional constraints that allow for improved restoration under certain conditions, especially when the power spectra of the noise and degradation function are not known with precision. In this article, we will explore the theory behind constrained least squares filtering, present key mathematical formulations, and demonstrate its practical application through iterative algorithms.

Constrained Least Squares Filtering: An Overview

The primary objective of CLSF is to minimize the error in estimating the undegraded image, subject to certain constraints. Mathematically, the degradation process can be represented as:

g=Hf+ηg = Hf + \eta

Where:

  • gg is the observed (degraded) image,
  • HH is the degradation function (blur kernel),
  • ff is the original image to be recovered,
  • η\eta is the additive noise.

The challenge in constrained least squares filtering is the formulation of an optimal estimate of the original image ff, given that the degradation function HH is often sensitive to noise. To address this, we introduce a smoothness constraint, which penalizes high-frequency components in the estimated image. The cost function to be minimized is:

C=x=0M1y=0N1[2f(x,y)]2C = \sum_{x=0}^{M-1} \sum_{y=0}^{N-1} [\nabla^2 f(x, y)]^2

Where 2\nabla^2 is the Laplacian operator, a measure of image smoothness.

Optimization Under Constraint

The constrained least squares optimization can be expressed as minimizing the following functional:

gHf2+γ2f2\| g – Hf \|^2 + \gamma \|\nabla^2 f\|^2

Where 2\| \cdot \|^2 denotes the Euclidean norm, and γ\gamma is the regularization parameter that controls the trade-off between fitting the observed data and maintaining smoothness in the restored image.

Frequency Domain Solution

By transforming the problem into the frequency domain, the CLSF solution can be expressed as:

F^(u,v)=H(u,v)H(u,v)2+γP(u,v)2G(u,v)\hat{F}(u, v) = \frac{H^*(u, v)}{|H(u, v)|^2 + \gamma |P(u, v)|^2} G(u, v)

Where:

  • F^(u,v)\hat{F}(u, v) is the Fourier transform of the restored image,
  • H(u,v)H^*(u, v) is the complex conjugate of the Fourier transform of the degradation function,
  • P(u,v)P(u, v) is the Laplacian operator in the frequency domain,
  • G(u,v)G(u, v) is the Fourier transform of the observed image.

This solution provides a balance between minimizing the noise and enforcing smoothness in the restored image.

Iterative Adjustment of γ\gamma

One of the key challenges in applying CLSF is selecting the appropriate value of γ\gamma, which determines the regularization strength. The optimal value of γ\gamma can be found iteratively. Let the residual vector be:

r=gHfr = g – Hf

We define a function ϕ(γ)\phi(\gamma) that measures the residual energy:

ϕ(γ)=rTrr2\phi(\gamma) = \frac{r^T r}{\|r\|^2}

The algorithm proceeds as follows:

  1. Initialize γ\gamma.
  2. Compute r2\|r\|^2.
  3. Adjust γ\gamma iteratively based on the residual energy until the optimal constraint is met.
FIGURE 5.30: Results of constrained least squares filtering

Practical Example and Visual Results

Figure 5.30 (as referred in the images) shows the results of applying constrained least squares filtering to a degraded image. By comparing the outputs for different values of γ\gamma, it is clear that CLSF outperforms the Wiener filter in high-noise environments. The figures illustrate how manual adjustment of γ\gamma leads to visually improved results, with higher regularization resulting in smoother and clearer reconstructions.

Computation of Noise Variance

The estimation of the noise variance ση2\sigma_\eta^2 is critical for determining the regularization parameters. The variance is computed as:

ση2=1MNx=0M1y=0N1[η(x,y)mη]2\sigma_\eta^2 = \frac{1}{MN} \sum_{x=0}^{M-1} \sum_{y=0}^{N-1} [\eta(x, y) – m_\eta]^2

Where mηm_\eta is the sample mean of the noise.

Conclusion

Constrained least squares filtering is a powerful tool for image restoration, especially in scenarios where the degradation process is highly sensitive to noise. By incorporating smoothness constraints and iteratively adjusting the regularization parameter, CLSF can achieve superior results compared to traditional methods like Wiener filtering, particularly in medium- and high-noise environments. However, it is crucial to carefully select the parameter γ\gamma to avoid over-smoothing or excessive noise amplification.

References

  1. Andrews, H. C., & Hunt, B. R. (1977). Digital Image Restoration. Prentice-Hall.
  2. Vogel, C. R. (2002). Computational Methods for Inverse Problems. SIAM.
  3. Chambolle, A., & Pock, T. (2011). A First-Order Primal-Dual Algorithm for Convex Problems with Applications to Imaging. Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision, 40(1), 120-145.
  4. Hansen, P. C., Nagy, J. G., & O’Leary, D. P. (2006). Deblurring Images: Matrices, Spectra, and Filtering. SIAM.
  5. Rudin, L. I., Osher, S., & Fatemi, E. (1992). Nonlinear Total Variation based Noise Removal Algorithms. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 60(1-4), 259-268.

Leave a Comment