1

CHAPTER IV
RESTORATION IN TRANSFORM DOMAIN
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Image transform plays an important role in digital image processing system.
Various image transforms such as Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT) [191][192], Discrete
Sine Transform (DST) [193], Singular value Decomposition (SVD) transform [194].
Curvelet transform (CT), and Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) [66][108] are
employed for various scientific and engineering applications. The DCT (2D) is a very
efficient transformation technique for achieving sparse representation of digital image
blocks for natural images. Its performance is very close to the optimum karhunen-loeve
transform (KLT) [02][195]. Thus, the DCT has been successfully implemented as the key
element in the various image-processing applications [196]. However, in the presence of
singularities or edges in an image, such near-optimality fails due to lack of sparsity, edges
cannot be restored effectively, and ringing artifacts arising in the restored image.
Meanwhile, within the category of DCT based restoration, it is observed that
sophisticated strategies such as shape adaptation [104][196] and weighted estimation
[197] have their own merits but the gain is often modest. So, the transform domain image
restoration techniques can be further classified based on linear, nonlinear operations and
their coefficient modeling.
4.2 CLASSIFICATION OF TRANSFORM DOMAIN RESTORATION
There are two basic approaches to image restoration, spatial domain restoration
and transform domain techniques. In transform domain, DWT is one of the powerful
mathematical CAD tool in image processing system. Image restoration techniques using
wavelet transform are effective because of its ability to capture most of the energy of
2
image signal in a significant transform coefficient. A particular technique that has been
introduced for considerable attention in the last decades based on wavelet thresholding or
shrinkage: technique to killing coefficients of less significant which having less
magnitude relative to some threshold. From the literature of the transform domain
restoration techniques, we can classify various techniques in the different categories
according to their basis functions. Classification of restoration techniques in the
transform domain and outline of this chapter is as shown in figure 4-1.
Transform Doamin
Image Restoration Techniques
Non-Adaptive
Wiener Filtering
Technique
Perspective, Analysis and Conclusion
Nonlinear Restoration
Techniques
(Threshold Filtering)
Wavelet Coefficient
Model
Non-Orthogonal
Wavelet Transform
Linear Restoration
Techniques
Adaptive
FoE/Gaussian FoE
Restoration Technique
Visu Shrink
BayesShrink
SUREShrink
Hard/Soft/Global
Threshold
Bilateral/ NL Mean
LMMSE Filtering
Technique
Random Marquo
FIeld (MRF)
UnDecimated
Wavelet
Transform
Tetrolet Transform
Contourlet Transform

Figure 1: Classification of Image Restoration Techniques in spatial domain and
outline of this chapter.
3
4.2.1 LINEAR RESTORATION TECHNIQUES
Linear restoration process in the transform domain such as wiener filter in the
wavelet domain yield optimal results when the image signal degradation can be modeled
as a Gaussian process and accuracy criterion is the MSE [198][199]. This particular
filtering operation successfully minimizes the MSE [200]. The field of expert (FoE)
technique is one of the linear restoration processes using wavelet transform. It has very
heavy-tailed derivative histograms, and response from random linear filters have very
heavy-tailed responses [201].
4.2.2 NON-LINEAR RESTORATION TECHNIQUES
Non-linear thresholding filtering techniques can be divided into two categories
based on number of data points: one is non-data adaptive thresholding and second is
adaptive thresholding filtering technique. Most of the investigated image restoration
techniques in transform (Wavelet) domain are the non-linear coefficient thresholding
based techniques. The procedure in which small transform coefficients are removed while
others are left untouched is called hard thresholding [111]. To overcome the demerits of
hard thresholding, wavelet transform using soft thresholding was also introduced [111].
The various thresholding and shrinkage techniques proposed in the literature are
VisuShrink [111] [112], SureShrink [113][115], Bayes Shrink [114], hard and soft
thresholding [202], and Global thresholding [203] etc. The windowing techniques such as
LAWML are also available in the literature where statistical relationship of transform
coefficients in a neighborhood is considered while restoring an image. The wavelet
domain methods are suitable in retaining the detailed structure, some time they
introduced Mat-like structures in the smooth region of the restored image [203][204]. The
predominant nonlinear techniques in transform domain are explained in the next
subsection of this chapter.
4
4.2.2.1 HARD THRESHOLDING
These methods used to determine the clean wavelet coefficients based on
thresholding. If the absolute value of coefficient is less than a threshold, then it is
assumed zero, otherwise it is unchanged. Mathematically it is represented as below
[111][205]:
( )( .*( ( ) )..........(4.1) x sign y y abs y =
4.2.2.2 SOFT THERESHOLDING
Hard thresholding causes Gibbs effect in the restored image. To overcome the
same, Donoho [111][112] introduced the soft thresholding method. If the absolute value
of a wavelet coefficient is less than a threshold ' ' then it is assumed to be zero
otherwise its value is shrunk by' ' . It can be represented as given below:
( ).*(( ( ) )*( ( ))).........(4.2) x sign y abs y abs y =
This removes the discontinuities, but degrades all the other coefficients which
tends to blur image.
4.2.2.3 VISUSHRINK
This is also called as universal thresholding technique. A threshold given by as
given below:
2log( ).........(4.3)
universal
T M o =
Where, M is the number of samples, and it is asymptotically yields a mean square error
estimate as M tends to infinity [114][205].
4.2.2.4 SURESHRINK
SureShrink is an adaptive thresholding technique where the transform coefficient
are treated in level-by-level fashion [205]. In each particular level, when there is an
information that the wavelet representation of that level is not sparse [205], a threshold
5
that minimizes Steins Unbiased Risk Estimate (SURE) is applicable. It is used to
suppress the degradation in transform domain where the threshold is employed for
restoration. In this case, threshold parameter
SURE
T can be expressed as below:
argmin ( ( ; ))..........(4.4)
Sure TH
T Sure TH Y =
2 2 2
1
1
( ; ) 2 .* : ( , ) ..........(4.5)
L
n n i i
i
Sure TH Y i Y TH Min Y TH
L
o o
=
| |
= s
` |
) \ .

This implies that the reconstruction is smooth wherever the function is smooth and it
jumps wherever there is discontinuity in the function. This method can generate very
sparse wavelet coefficient resulting in an inadequate threshold [205].
4.2.2.5 BAYESSHRINK
This restoration technique is based on the Bayesian mathematical framework. A
generalized Gaussian distribution (GGD) models the wavelet coefficients of natural
images. This is used to calculate the threshold using a Bayesian framework [114]. S.
Grace Chang et. al. [114] has been presented an approximation and simple formula for
the threshold as given below:
2
( )
.........(4.6)
n
h
s
T
o
o
| |
=
|
\ .

If
s
o is non-zero otherwise it is set to some predetermined maximum value.
2 2
(( ) ( ) , )..........(4.7)
s y n
Max o o o o =
( )
2
1
( ..........(6.8)
y n
W
N
o =


The noise variance
n
o is estimated from HH band [114][205] as median ( ) 0.6745,
n
W >
where
n
W represents the wavelet coefficient after subtracting the mean [206].
6
4.2.2.6 SHRINKAGE TECNHIQUES
These types of techniques based on shrink the wavelet coefficient given:
( .* ), : 0 1 x y y where y = s s . It is the shrinkage factor. Further, some important methods
belong to this class has been explained.
4.2.2.7 MMSE TECNHIQUES
Michak et. al. have been proposed the linear minimum mean square estimation
(MMSE) method using a locally estimated variance [200]. An optimal predictor for the
clean wavelet transform coefficient at location ' ' k is given below:
2 2 2
, .
*( ) / ( )..........(4.9)
k k x k x k n
x y o o o = +
Where,
. x k
o is the image signal variance estimated at location ' ' k and
n
o is the
degradation variance,
k
y represents the noisy coefficients and
k
x represents the
estimated wavelet transform coefficients. There are two approaches are presented to
estimate the local variance. The first approach is used an approximate maximum
likelihood estimator (MLE) as shown below:
2 2
( , ) ( . )
argmax ( )..........(4.10)
x k i x k
P y o o = [
The second is used the maximum a posteriori estimator (MAPE) as given below:
2 2 2
( , ) ( , ) ( , )
argmax( ( ( ))). ( )..........(4.11)
x y i x k x k
P y P o o o = [
Where
2
2 ( )
( , )
( ) .
x k
P e
o
o

= is empirically chosen [207][208].
4.2.2.8 HAAR WAVELET TRANSFORM BASED TECNHIQUES
The Haar transform is one of the most simple wavelet transform. The scaling and
wavelet function for Haar transform are defined as follows:
{
1 0 1
0
( ) ..........(4.12)
for t
otherwise
t |
( (
=

{
1 0 0.5
0.5 0.5 1
( ) ..........(4.13)
for t
for t
t
< <
< <
=
7
The above equations shows the scaling and wavelet function at different scales and
translation indices [31][207].
4.2.2.9 TETROLATE TRANSFORM BASED TECNHIQUES
Jens Krommweh et. al. [208] has been proposed a new method for image
restoration using an adaptive Haar transform. It is also called as tetrolate transform. In
this restoration process, images are subdivided into 4x4 blocks. The features of this
image restoration technique are as follows: i) simplicity ii) less storage iii) redundant
coefficient iv) scalability. A finer image restoration technique is tetromino partitions are
picked and the averages of such restored images are taken [207].
4.2.3 WAVELET COEFFICIENT MODEL
Under this particular approach focused on exploiting the multiresolution
properties of wavelet transformation technique. Its identification is to close correlation of
image signal at various resolutions by obtaining the same across the multiple resolutions
[201]. These types of image restoration process can be classified into two categories: one
is deterministic and second is statistical modeling of wavelet coefficient [35].
4.2.3.1 DETERMINISTIC COEFFICIENT MODEL
In this particular modeling, process the tree structure of wavelet coefficients is
used. Tree structure is representing the scale of transformation and nodes are representing
the wavelet coefficients [4]. The optimal tree approximation displays a hierarchical
interpretation of wavelet decomposition [4][201].
4.2.3.2 STATISTICAL COEFFICIENT MODEL
Statistical approach is to restore a digital image focused on the some more
interesting and appealing properties of the wavelet transform such as multiscale
8
correlation between the wavelet coefficients, local correlation between neighborhood
coefficients [209]. This particular technique can be subdivided into two categories: one is
marginal probabilistic model and other is joint probabilistic model to restore the digital
image in the transform domain [4][209].
Marginal probabilistic model based restoration technique will works on the
distribution of coefficients. And that distribution process is highly kurtotic, and usually
have a marked peak at zero and heavy tails [209][210]. The Gaussian mixture model
(GMM) and generalized Gaussian model (GGD) are commonly used to model the
wavelet coefficients distribution. Chang et. al. [114] have been proposed the use of
adaptive wavelet thresholding for image restoration, by modeling the coefficients as a
generalized Gaussian random variable, whose parameters are estimated locally within
given neighborhood [114][200].
Joint probabilistic models in transform domain (wavelet) are efficient in capturing
inter-scale dependencies [35]. Marko Random Field (MRF) models are more efficient to
capture intrascale correlation in transform domain [211]. Marko Random Field (MRF)
based model can be used to capture higher order statistics in image data. We have
implemented Markov Random Field (MRF) based image restoration method and its
explained in details in the subsection 4.3 of this chapter.
4.2.4 NON-ORTHOGONAL WAVELET BASED TECNHIQUES
Undecimated wavelet transform (UDWT) based restoration also been used for
decomposing the image signal to provide visually better artifacts such as Pseudo-Gibbs
phenomenon. Though the improvement in result is much higher, use of UDWT adds a
large overhead of computations thus making it less feasible [203]. Shift invariant wavelet
packet decomposition (SIWPD) is exploited to obtain of basis function of the
9
transformation process. Then using minimum description length principle the better basis
function was found out which yielded smallest code length required for description of the
given image data [212].
4.3 MRF BASED RESTORATION METHOD
Many problems in digital image processing specially in restoration or edge
detection acceptable into a general image labeling framework, where a given label is
assigned to each image pixel. In image restoration, the label that is assigned to a image
element is the exact gray value of its intensity level. The value of wavelet coefficient in
this particular framework can also be interpreted as labels assigned to the corresponding
elements of image in the whole data of digital image [213]. Markow random field (MRF)
based restoration process will provide a convenient way of modeling within local
interaction and it is described by statistical dependencies of an image element on the
labels in its local surrounding [214]. Further, it is introduced the notation and definitions
of Markow Random Field (MRF).
Let {1, 2, 3,... } N n = is a finite index set of on a regular rectangular lattice. The
elements of N correspond to points at which an image is sampled, i.e. to the location of
image elements. A family of random variables
1 2 3
{ , , ,... }
n
X X X X X = defined on the set
N is called the image field. The notation X x = will be used to abbreviate the joint event
1 1 2 3
( , , ,... )
n
X x x x x = . The vector
1 2
{ , ,......, }
n
x x x x = is a configuration of ' ' X ,
corresponding to a given realization of the image data field. The space of all possible
configurations of ' ' X will be denoted by X; a subscript in the notation of a vector will
be used to designate that only some variables are exists in the vector i.e.
( )
{ : { }}.
k N
l
X k N l X = e

A random field is a family of random variables
1
{ ,.......... }
n
X X X = such that all of its possible configurations have firmly positive
10
probability. A particular class of random field model called Markov random fields (MRF)
furthermore requires that the label of every image element be influenced only by pixels
that are its neighbors within the image [215][216]. It is not necessary, but regularly these
neighborhood are the elements that surrounding the current one. Formally, the
neighboring relationship of the image pixel is defined as follows:
A collection { : } l l N c = c e of subset of N is called a neighborhood system, if the
neighborhoods l c associated with the sites l satisfy: ) i l l ec and ) : ii l k ec if and only if
. k l ec , the sites l k ec are called neighbors of k .
The order coding of the neighborhood up to the order five is shown in figure 4.2
(a). There are two examples also shown in figure 4.2., it shows in figure 4-2(b), the
neighborhood structure known as the four point or we can say that the first order
neighborhood of the center element. Figure 4.2(c) shows eight point neighborhood or
second order neighborhood of that pixel. Irregular grids are also useful in specific
engineering applications in an image restoration and segmentation.

6
3
1 4
1
3
6
1 3 6 1 3 6
2
S
4 5
2 4
4 5
2 4 2 4
5 4 4 5

(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 4-1: Graph of Marquov Model in vision, (a) Order coding of neighborhood
structure. (b) Simple 4-connected grid of image pixels. (first order) (c)
Grids with greater connectivity can be useful-for example to achieve more
geometrical detail-as here with 8-connected pixel grid (second order).

11
In practical purpose, these two neighborhood structures are the most frequently
used in image restoration process. Formally, the definition of the MRF has been
explained as: The random field Xis a Markov field with respect to the neighborhood
systemc , if for all x X e :
\
( ) ( )..........(4.14)
l l N l l l l l
P X x P X x x
c c
= X = = X =
According to the above definition, the probability of a image element label
l
x ,
given all other labels within an image, reduces to a function of neighboring labels only.
Through choosing an arbitrary large neighborhood, the MRF model can be applied to
every image for any various sizes. MRF models that are used in image processing are
often homogeneous [217][218] i.e. strictly stationary, meaning that the distribution
( )
l l l l
P X x x
c c
= X = is the same for all pixels l .
4.4 SIMULATION METHODOLOGY
The state of art transform domain image restoration techniques: linear restoration
techniques, nonlinear restoration techniques (non-data adaptive and adaptive thresholding
based), wavelet coefficient model based techniques, and non-orthogonal wavelet
transform based techniques are simulated on MATLAB 7.8.0.347 platform over a
WINDOW-XP operating system. Moreover, stochastic model based technique i.e.
Markov Random Field (MRF) is also simulated on the same platform. All transform
domain restoration techniques are simulated with the combinations of different
degradations (Gaussian, Speckle, Poisson, and Salt & Pepper noise) and various types of
images from diversified fields (Medical, Natural, Aerial, and Underwater). Standard test
images from various fields of sizes 256x256, 512x512 are used for simulation. The
universal quality parameter (PSNR, MSE) and other difference distortion, correlation
distortion metrics has been adapted to evaluate the performance of all restoration
12
techniques. All degradations with same standard deviation (SD) are used for simulation
purpose. These synthetic degradations are added to all images in controlled fashion.
Moreover, noisy images were obtained for processing. The best performing technique
was decided according to the value of PSNR and MSE to the combinations of specific
noise and image from particular field.
4.5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this chapter, standard transform domain image restoration techniques are
simulated and compared its performance. We have analyzed one thousand five hundred
and ninety six (1596) different combinations of various fields (03), types of image (07),
different synthetic degradations (04), and various transform domain restoration
techniques (19). The performances obtained from these combinations are tabulated in
table 4-1. The analysis is based on universal quality parameters i.e. peak signal to noise
ratio (PSNR) and mean square error (MSE). Then we tried to find out the optimal
restoration technique in transform domain to particular combination of noise and image
from specific field. Further, we are also trying to specify the category to optimal
restoration technique. Out of these combinations, we have concluded some optimum
selection of techniques according to their performance and it is tabulated in table 4-2.
From table 4-1 and table 4-2, the following conclusions are drawn according to the
performance of various transform domain image restoration techniques.
There is no single restoration technique, which is highly suitable to all
combination of different types of noise and various images from diversified fields.
However, we have found few image restoration techniques, which perform finest for a
particular type of image irrespective of the type of noise. Similarly, we have also found
few image restoration techniques that perform best for specific noise irrespective of the
13
type of the images from various fields. It is observed that adaptive local filtering
technique is providing better performance to major combinations of images from these
three fields and four types of noise and its shown in table 4-2.

V
a
r
i
o
u
s

F
i
e
l
d
s

o
f

I
m
a
g
e
s

Types of Noise
Suitable Image Restoration Techniques
Gaussian Noise Poisson Noise Speckle Noise
Salt & Pepper
Noise
Medical
Field
Undecimated DWT
Filtering (10)
NL-Mean Filtering
(09)
Non-Parametric Bayesian
Dictionary Learning (01)
Adaptive Local
Filter (DWT) (14)
Adaptive Local
Filter (DWT) (14)
Natural
Field
Adaptive Local
Filter (DWT) (14)
Non-Parametric Bayesian
Dictionary Learning (01)
Adaptive Local
Filter (DWT) (14)
Adaptive Local
Filter (DWT) (14)
Aerial
Field
Adaptive Local Filter
(DWT) (14)
Adaptive Local Filter (14)
Non-Parametric Bayesian
Dictionary Learning (01)
Adaptive Local
Filter (DWT) (14)
Adaptive Local
Filter (DWT) (14)
Table 4-2: Combination of different field and specific noise according to performance
of various transform domain image restoration techniques for optimum
selection (broad analysis).
The performance of adaptive local filter (discrete wavelet transform) is the better
as compared to all other transform domain restoration techniques in presence of any type
of degradations. There is not a single other technique in transform domain that performs
better than adaptive local filtering technique to any combination of aerial images
degraded by various type of noise. Adaptive local filtering technique is comes under the
non-linear filtering category of restoration technique in transform domain. Performance
of adaptive local filter is shown in figure 4-2. We have taken total ten images from aerial
fields to observe the performance of the same restoration technique. After considering
performance of this technique to all aerial images then we have concluded that the
adaptive local filtering technique is highly suitable to aerial field images.
14

Figure 4-2: Analysis of various restoration techniques towards Aerial field images.
The performance of adaptive local filtering technique is better for the combination
of image from natural field and all types of synthetic degradations except Poisson noise.
For the combination of Poisson noise occurs in natural fields images, non-parametric
Bayesian dictionary learning filtering technique is highly suitable. This analysis is done
for all restoration techniques in transform domain. This inference is only for images from
natural field oriented. This technique is also in nonlinear class in transform domain.
Performance of this nonlinear technique is shown in figure 4-3.


Figure 4-3: Analysis of various restoration techniques towards Natural field images.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
Bone (X-Ray) Apperts (MRI) Brain (CT) Baboon (Animal) House (Trees
&Home)
Planet (Satellite) Chemical Plant
(Satellite)
Medical Natural Arial
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Images & Fields
Analysis of Adaptive Local Filter
Nonparametric Bayesian Dictionary
Learning filtering Technique
NL-Mean Filtering Technique
Undecimated DWT Filtering
Technique
Adaptive Local (DWT)
Filtering Technique
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
Bone (X-Ray) Apperts (MRI) Brain (CT) Baboon (Animal) House (Trees
&Home)
Planet (Satellite) Chemical Plant
(Satellite)
Medical Natural Arial
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Image & Fields
Analysis of ALF & NLBDLF
Nonparametric
Bayesian Dictionary
Learning for Analysis
Adaptive Local
(DWT) Filter
15
For images from medical field, no specific restoration technique perform superior
for any type of degradations. However, if we consider individual degradation (noise) then
we get restoration technique that suppress the specific type of noise. Undecimated DWT
filtering technique and NL-Mean filtering technique performs moderately for medical
field images degraded by AWGN. Similarly, non-parametric Bayesian dictionary
learning filtering technique performs better for medical images corrupted by Speckle, Salt
& Pepper noise as compared to other restoration techniques in transform domain [219]. It
is shown in figure 4-4.


Figure 4-4: Analysis of various restoration techniques towards Medical field images.
From table 4-1 and table 4-2, some inferences to noise oriented are as follows:
It is observed that adaptive local filtering technique is highly suitable to suppress
the Salt & Pepper noise from any type of image of various fields. Performance ALF
technique in the form of PSNR is shown in figure 4-5.
Non-parametric Bayesian dictionary learning filtering technique performs better
to all type of images from various fields contaminated by Poisson noise except aerial
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
Bone (X-
Ray)
Apperts
(MRI)
Brain (CT) Baboon
(Animal)
House (Trees
&Home)
Planet
(Satellite)
Chemical Plant
(Satellite)
Medical Natural Arial
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Image and Fields
Analysis for Medical Field
Nonparametric Bayesian
Dictionary Learning for Analysis
NL-Mean
Undecimated DWT
16
field images. ALF technique performs best in the presence of Poisson noise. However,
next to this particular technique non-parametric dictionary learning filtering technique
performs better as compared to other restoration techniques in transform domain. It is
shown in figure 4-6.


Figure 4-5: Analysis of various restoration techniques towards SPN and SN.
Adaptive local filtering technique is also suitable to suppress the Speckle noise
from all type of images from diversified field [219]. It is shown in figure 4-5.


Figure 4-6: Analysis of various restoration techniques towards AWGN and PN.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
Bone (X-
Ray)
Apperts
(MRI)
Brain (CT) Baboon
(Animal)
House (Trees
&Home)
Planet
(Satellite)
Chemical Plant
(Satellite)
Medical Natural Arial
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Image & Fields
Analysis of ALF Technqiue for SN & SPN
Adaptive Local
(DWT) Filter
Max. value of
PSNR
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
Bone (X-Ray) Apperts (MRI) Brain (CT) Baboon
(Animal)
House (Trees
&Home)
Planet (Satellite) Chemical Plant
(Satellite)
Medical Natural Arial
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Image and Fields
Analysis to the various noise
Nonparametric
Bayesian Dictionary
Learning for
Analysis
NL-Mean
Undecimated DWT
Adaptive
Local (DWT) Filter
17
Adaptive local filtering technique performs best for any image corrupted with
AWGN except medical field images. For medical field images contaminated with
AWGN, Undecimated DWT (UDWT) filtering technique and NL-mean filtering
techniques performs finest as compared to all other restoration technique in transform
domain. It is shown in figure 4-6.
From table 4-1 and table 4-2, it is seen then the performance of ALF technique is
almost same for particular image irrespective of the any type of degradation. Therefore, if
we take any particular image and add various type of noise to it and after restored by
ALF technique we get the image that is having same PSNR for all type of noise [219].
So, for a specific image the performance in the form PSNR of ALF technique is constant
irrespective of the type of degradation. It is reflect in figure 4-5.
The performance of non-parametric dictionary learning filtering technique is
superior for any type of image in presence of Poisson noise but ironically its performance
comparatively poor for Salt & Pepper noise. It is shown in figure 4-7.


Figure 4-7: Analysis of non-parametric Bayesian Dictionary Learning filtering
technique.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
Bone (X-
Ray)
Apperts
(MRI)
Brain (CT) Baboon
(Animal)
House (Trees
&Home)
Planet
(Satellite)
Chemical Plant
(Satellite)
Medical Natural Arial
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Images and Fields
Nonparametric Bayesian Dictionary Learning for Analysis
Nonparametric Bayesian
Dictionary Learning for
Analysis
18

The performance of VisuShrink filtering technique is poor for aerial field images
in presence of any type of noise as compared to its performance to medical field and
natural field images degraded by any type of nose.


Figure 4-8: Analysis of VisuShrink: Nonlinear Thresholding filtering (Non-Adaptive)
technique.
The performance of hard thresholding and soft thresholding to the medical field
images is not up to the mark in presence of AWGN and Salt & Pepper noise as compared
to its performance in presence of Poisson and Speckle noise for same field images and its
shown in next figure 4-9.


Figure 4-8: Analysis of Hard and Soft Thresholding Filtering Techniques.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
Bone (X-Ray) Apperts (MRI) Brain (CT) Baboon
(Animal)
House (Trees
&Home)
Planet (Satellite) Chemical Plant
(Satellite)
Medical Natural Arial
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Image & Field
Analysis of visu shrink
Analysis of visu
shrink
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
i
o
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
Bone (X-Ray) Apperts (MRI) Brain (CT) Baboon (Animal) House (Trees
&Home)
Planet (Satellite) Chemical Plant
(Satellite)
Medical Natural Arial
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Image & Fields
Analysis of Hard and Soft Thresholding Restoration Techniques
Hard Thresholding
Soft Thresholding
19
4.6 ANALYSIS OF MRF BASED RESTORATION TECHNIQUE
In previous subsection of this chapter, we have analyzed state-of-art transform
domain image restoration techniques to find out optimal technique to particular
combination of specific noise and certain image from diversified field. In this subsection,
joint probabilistic wavelet coefficient model using Marquov Random Field (MRF) based
restoration technique has been analyzed. The MRF theory gives a convenient and
consistent way of modeling context dependent entities such as image elements and
correlated features. While simulation the particular technique we have considered the
four type of synthetic degradations (Gaussian, Speckle, Poisson, and Salt & Pepper noise)
and various fields (Medical, Natural, Aerial, and Underwater). The performance in the
form of PSNR values is tabulated in table 4-3. The performance of MRF based
restoration technique to the different combinations is as shown from figure 4-9 to figure
4-13.


Figure 4-9: Analysis of MRF Based Image Restoration Technique Towards Medical
Field Images. (Objective analysis in the form of PSNR according to the
combinations of noise and images).
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
MRI-I MRI-II MRI-III CT-IV CT-V CT-VI CT-VII X-Ray-
VIII
X-Ray-
IX
X-Ray-
X
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Medical Field Images
PSNR of MRF Based Restoration Technique (Analysis of Medical Field)
PSNR of MRF Based
Restoration Technique
(Analysis of Medical
Field)
20

Figure 4-10: Analysis of MRF Based Image Restoration Technique Towards Natural
Field Images. (Objective analysis in the form of PSNR according to the
combinations of noise and images).


Figure 4-11: Analysis of MRF Based Image Restoration Technique Towards Aerial Field
Images. (Objective analysis in the form of PSNR according to the
combinations of noise and images).

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
IM-I IM-II IM-III IM-IV IM-V IM-VI IM-VII IM-VIII IM-IX IM-X
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Natural Field Images
PSNR of MRF Based Restoration Technique (Natural Field Images)
PSNR of MRF
Based Restoration
Technique (Natural
Field Images)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
IM-I IM-II IM-III IM-IV IM-V IM-VI IM-VII IM-VIII IM-IX IM-X
AERIAL FIELD
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Aerial Field Images
PSNR of MRF Based Restoration Technique
PSNR of MRF
Based Restoration
Technique
21

Figure 4-12: Analysis of MRF Based Image Restoration Technique Towards Under
Water Field Images. (Objective analysis in the form of PSNR according to
the combinations of noise and images).

Figure 4-13: Analysis of MRF Based Image Restoration Technique Towards All
Combinations of all types of Noise and Field. (Objective analysis in the
form of PSNR according to the combinations of noise and images).
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
IM-I IM-II IM-III IM-IV IM-V IM-VI IM-VII IM-VIII IM-IX IM-X
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Under Water Images
PSNR of MRF Based Restoration Technique(Analysis of Under Water images)
PSNR of MRF Based
Restoration
Technique(Analysis
of Under Water
images)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
G
a
u
s
s
i
a
n
P
o
i
s
s
o
n
S
p
e
c
k
l
e
S
a
l
t

&

P
e
p
p
e
r
IM-I IM-II IM-III IM-IV IM-V IM-VI IM-VII IM-VIII IM-IX IM-X
P
S
N
R

i
n

d
B

Different Type of Noise
Analysis of MRF Based Technqiue to All types of Images Medical Images
Natural Image
Aerial Image
Underwater Image
22
From figure 4-9 to figure 4-13, out of these combinations of different images (40),
various noise (04), diversified fields (04), and one restoration technique, we have
concluded some optimum performance of MRF based technique to the particular
combination of noise and image, according to objective analysis and noise level
classification. These optimum selections are depicted in table 4-4.

Sr.No. Field Noise
Suitability of MRF based restoration technique to the
combination of noise and field according to the PSNR
value in dB. In addition, Noise Level classification
according to the table 1-1.
01 Any Field
Gaussian
Noise
Highly Suitable
( Noise level in restored image very low)
02 Any Field
Poisson
Noise
Moderately Suitable
(Noise level in restored image low)
03 Any Field
Speckle
Noise
Suitable
(Noise level in restored image medium)
04 Any Field
Salt &
Pepper Noise
Not Suitable
(Noise level in restored image high)
Table 4-4: Performance of joint probabilistic wavelet coefficient model using Marquov
Random Field (MRF) based restoration technique to the combination of
various noise and images from medical, aerial, natural, and under water
fields.
It is observed that from table 4-4, if any image from diversified fields degraded by
Gaussian noise then MRF based image restoration technique is highly suitable. From any
image to suppress the Poisson noise, MRF based technique can be utilize effectively. If
Speckle noise occurs in any image then this method can be utilize to reduce up to the
mark. According to the noise level occurs in the restored image that degraded by Salt &
Pepper noise, this technique is not showing a superlative performance [219] [220].
23
For proper judgment of the performance of MRF based image restoration
technique in transform domain, the subjective evaluation can be taken into consideration.
Performance of this technique on standard images (field wise) with various tones is
shown in figure 4-14 and figure 4-15.


(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 4-14: Subjective analysis of MRF based restoration technique using wavelet
transform; (a) & (b): Aerial images, (c) & (d): Natural images, (e) Medical
image (f) Under water image with Gaussian noise.
24

(a) (b)


(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 4-14: Subjective analysis of MRF based restoration technique using wavelet
transform; (a) Poisson noise: Medical image, (b) Poisson noise: Natural
image, (c) Poisson noise: Underwater image (d) Salt & Pepper noise: Aerial
image (e) Speckle noise: Aerial image (f) Speckle noise: Medical Image.
Further, while analyzing both objective and subjective, it is observed that
performance of this restoration technique yields good visual quality of all restored images
from various fields degraded by Gaussian noise [220].
Inferences are drawn in the next subsection of this chapter.
25
4.7 CONCLUSION
The performance of various restoration techniques in transform domain viz. linear
and nonlinear thresholding filtering process based restoration techniques (Visu Shrink,
Sure Shrink, Bayes Shrink, hard and soft thresholding, global thresholding, Gaussian
field of expert (GFoE), Active random field (ARF)), Wavelet coefficient model based
deterministic and statistical (tree approximation, GMM, GGD, HMM and proposed MRF
based technique), non-orthogonal wavelet transform based undecimated wavelet
transform (UDWT) are studied. Above all, transform domain image restoration
techniques are analyzed with the combinations of synthetic noise and various fields.
From table 4-1 and table 4-2; we have found some suitable restoration techniques
to noise specific and image specific in transform domain. We have also shown from
figure 4-2 to figure 4-9 performances of specific techniques to the particular
combinations of synthetic degradations and image from various fields. We have specified
the category of restoration technique according to their processes to the combinations in
transform domain.
Table 4-3, shows the performance of joint probabilistic statistical wavelet
coefficient MRF model based image restoration technique in wavelet domain. A broad
inference has shown in table 4-3 and table 4-4.
From table 4-3 and figure 4-9 to figure 4-13, further major results of this chapter
lies in the estimation of MRF based restoration technique to suppress the synthetic
degradations from noisy image in transform domain. Simulation experiments indicate
that the technique and yielding results that are superior to specific combination and worst
for particular combination to those obtained by state-of-art restoration technique in
transform domain. It is observed that, significant and some insignificant gains are
achieved by using MRF at the expense of an increase in the computational complexity.