A Sine-Cosine Optimizer-Based Gamma

Corrected Adaptive Fractional

Differential Masking for Satellite Image
Enhancement

Himanshu Singh, Anil Kumar and L. K. Balyan

Abstract The prime objective is to harvest more and more information present
in a remotely sensed dark satellite image, captured under poorly illuminated cir-
cumstances. For imparting optimal quality enhancement, a recently proposed and
highly efficient Sine-Cosine optimizer is employed in association with a novel opti-
mally weighted gamma corrected (GC) fractional differential (FD) order masking
framework. Overall texture enhancement is achieved by optimally ordered FD mask-
ing along with its optimal augmentation with GC interim channel. Core objective
of entropy enhancement is fulfilled by keeping a proper check for over-enhanced or
saturated regions through the introduction of penalty term in the employed cost func-
tion, for adaptive exploration and identification of missing levels for more optimal
redistribution throughout the permissible range; so that natural look can be preserved
efficiently. Rigorous experimentation is performed by employing performance eval-
uation and comparison with preexisting highly appreciated quality enhancement
approaches.

Keywords Sine-cosine algorithm (SCA) · Fractional differential (FD) order

filter · Optimal masking · Gamma correction · Image quality enhancement

1 Introduction

Remotely sensed digital imagery whenever acquired in unavoidable, unfavorable, and

poorly illuminated situations usually requires a rigorous, efficient, and highly adap-
tive preprocessing for intrinsic and visual quality enhancement. More specifically,
such images are identified as remotely sensed dark satellite images. Conventionally
proposed general enhancement approaches sometimes do not support the reliable
and robust quality enhancement especially for dark images [1]. The explicit signif-
icance of remotely acquired image is quite understood irrespective of the domain

H. Singh (B) · A. Kumar · L. K. Balyan

Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and Manufacturing, Jabalpur, India
e-mail: himanshu.iiitj@ieee.org

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 633

N. Yadav et al. (eds.), Harmony Search and Nature Inspired Optimization Algorithms,
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing 741,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0761-4_61
634 H. Singh et al.

of application as most of the technological human welfare advancements rely on

it [2]. Wide varieties of methodologies are already available in literature for gen-
eral images as discussed in [1, 2]. Initially, general histogram equalization (GHE)
[3] was introduced, and then, its multiple variants have been proposed. In the same
context, necessity of localized processing seems more aspiring and hence various
sub-equalization inspired histogram based enhancement approaches have been also
proposed. A detailed literature analysis in this context is also available in [1, 2].
Significant contributions like contrast-limited adaptive HE [4] also dragged the core
attraction of the researchers. Statistical segmentation based sub-equalization like
median-mean based sub-image clipped HE (MMSICHE) [5] has been also intro-
duced. Later on, the averaging histogram equalization (AVGHEQ) [6]; HE based
optimal profile compression (HEOPC) [7] method for color image enhancement
followed by HE with maximum intensity coverage (HEMIC) [8] have been also pro-
posed. Also, the adaptive gamma correction with weighting distribution (AGCWD)
[9] and its efficient variations [10–13] have been also proposed for dark images.
Afterwards, the intensity- and edge-based adaptive unsharp masking filter (IEUMF)
[14] based enhancement has been also proposed by employing the unsharp masking
filter for edge augmentation. Here, the gamma correction is optimally associated in
a weighed summation manner with fractional order differential masking (using self-
proposed novel mask framing technique), and consequently an efficiently improved
intensity as well as texture based quality enhancement approach is presented with
proper restoration and consequent restoration of the high frequency content of the
images.
The rest of the manuscript is organized as: Sect. 2 deals with the problem for-
mulation and the proposed methodology. Performance evaluation and comparison
based experimental results are presented in Sect. 3 and finally, conclusions are drawn
in Sect. 4.

2 Proposed Methodology

In general, parallel multi-band processing is eventually desired for multispectral as

well as multiple band images. Enhancement for correspondingly equivalent color
images is employed by applying standard Hue Saturation Intensity (HSI) framework
for efficient decoupling of the chromatic and non-chromatic content of the image as

[H (m, n), S(m, n), I (m, n)]T  TRGB

HSI
[R(m, n), G(m, n), B(m, n)]T , (1)

HSI
Here, TRGB symbolizes the RGB to HSI equivalence conversion. Quality improve-
ment for color images is professionally achieved through isolated processing of lumi-
nance intensity channel only. Rest of the channels namely, hue and saturation are
kept preserved without any change. The weighted distributed summation enhanced
channel is finally achieved by amalgamation of statistically derived interim gamma
A Sine-Cosine Optimizer Based Gamma Corrected Adaptive … 635

corrected as well as fractional differentially ordered and augmented interim images,

collectively, as

Iw  α.Ig + (1 − α).Ifdmf , (2)

Analytical formation for both interim images can be described as follows. Cumu-
lative distribution for input intensity channel is used to obtain gamma value set
optimally as

γ (i)  1 − (β).cdfw (i), (3)

Gamma corrected enhanced image can be achieved as

Ig (i)  [I (i)]γ (i) , (4)

Making the core foundation of the “adaptive edge as well as texture augmentation”
principle, a highly robust self-proposed novel fractional differential mask framing
strategy is efficiently employed for constructive and collective “edge restoration
along with texture enhancement” which is also amalgamated and optimally associ-
ated with adaptively derived optimal gamma value set, through a parallel pipelining
for overall quality enhancement. Different types of fractional order differential 2-D
filters have been suggested till date, for textural quality improvements for an image.
Here, obeying the fractional calculus based standard Grunwald–Letnikov (G-L) def-
inition, vth order differential for f (x) (where f (x) ∈ [a, x], a ∈ R, x ∈ R), can
be symbolized as [15]

n−1 
   
GL v −v −v
a Dx f (x)  lim h −v f (x − mh) , where,
h→0
m0
m m
(−v) (−v + 1) . . . (−v + m − 1)
 ,
m! (5)

Here, h must be unity, as minimum in-between adjacent pixel distance is unity.

The above definition when applied over a 2-D digital image, the corresponding partial
differential equation w.r.t. x and y respectively can be expressed as [15]
∂ v f (x, y) (−v)(−v + 1)
Dxv f (x, y)  ≈ f (x, y) + (−v) f (x − 1, y) + f (x − 2, y)
∂xv 2
(−v)(−v + 1)(−v + 2) (n − v)
+ f (x − 3, y) + · · · + f (x − n, y), (6)
6 (−v)(n + 1)
∂ v f (x, y) (−v)(−v + 1)
D vy f (x, y)  ≈ f (x, y) + (−v) f (x, y − 1) + f (x, y − 2)
∂ yv 2
(−v)(−v + 1)(−v + 2) (n − v)
+ f (x, y − 3) + · · · + f (x, y − n), (7)
6 (−v)(n + 1)

Core objective is to employ 2-D convolutional filtering by a 2-D FD order 3 × 3

masking filter, whose coefficients are derived by the proposed uniformly balanced
636 H. Singh et al.

gradient behavior along all directions. Here adjacent neighborhood interdependency

is considered. Corresponding masks to be operated along x and y-directions are
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
Q P P Q Q Q
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
Hx  ⎝ Q P 1 ⎠; and Hy  ⎝ P P P ⎠, (8)
Q P P P 1 P

Motivation is to equally distribute the impact of GL-FD coefficients (first three

coefficients, i.e., [1, C1 , C2 ]), and it can be understood that unity coefficient is sur-
rounded by 5 coefficients (here, P) at unity distance and remaining coefficients at
twice as

5 ∗ P  C1 ; 3 ∗ Q  C2 , (9)
  
[1, C1 , C2 ]  1, (−v), v 2 − v /2 , (10)
⎛ ⎞
(C2 /3) (C1 /5) (C1 /5)
⎜ ⎟
Hx  ⎝ (C2 /3) (C1 /5) 1 ⎠; and
(C2 /3) (C1 /5) (C1 /5)
⎛ ⎞
(C2 /3) (C2 /3) (C2 /3)
⎜ ⎟
Hy  ⎝ (C1 /5) (C1 /5) (C1 /5) ⎠, (11)
(C1 /5) 1 (C1 /5)
⎛ ⎞
v 2 − v /6 (−v/5) (−v/5)
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
Hx  ⎜ v 2 − v /6 (−v/5) 1 ⎟; and
⎝ ⎠
v 2 − v /6 (−v/5) (−v/5)
⎛   ⎞
v 2 − v /6 v 2 − v /6 v 2 − v /6
⎜ ⎟
Hy  ⎜
⎝ (−v/5) (−v/5) (−v/5) ⎟
⎠ (12)
(−v/5) 1 (−v/5)

For such masks, prescribed fractional order lies in the range (0, 1) and hence
optimal value according to image under consideration has to be evaluated adaptively.
Here, the linear filtering through mask Hx and Hy is done along left to right direction
across the rows followed by up to down across columns, respectively. Fractionally
ordered filtering is imparted through these masks to extract texture information as,

Iv  Iin ⊗ H (13)

Adaptive behavior for various intensity levels can be implied by imparting hyper-
bolic profiled mapping derived by the adaptive gain adjustment parameter (λ) as

λ  0.5[1 + tanh(3 − 6(|Iv | − 0.5))], (14)

A Sine-Cosine Optimizer Based Gamma Corrected Adaptive … 637

Finally, interim intensity channel is evaluated by optimally ordered FD masking

filter to associate the texture enhancement. Inspired from augmentation principle, as

Ifdmf  Iin + k.λ.Iv , (15)

Iv can be obtained as convolutional filtering utilizing a v− ordered FD masking

filter as above. k is an optimal scaling constant. While evaluating Iˆen , unfortunately
over-ranging may get resulted, and it should be minimized efficiently and hence it
can be included as a penalty term in the cost function framed here, as
   
J  H.σ 2 . σ 2 μ . 1 − n ov (M ∗ N ) , (16)

where
 
n ov  ĩ mn < 0 ∪ ĩ mn > 1 , (17)

Here, μ, σ 2 , σ 2 and H stands for output brightness, contrast, relative con-

trast, and output entropy, respectively for an M ∗ N image. Here, n ov is the count
of the normalized over-ranged pixels. Cost function is devised here, so that the rel-
ative variance along with maximal information restoration can be imparted with
proper check on relative mean brightness. Recently proposed Sine-Cosine Algo-
rithm (SCA) [16] is employed here for optimal enhancement for dark images by effi-
cient exploration, followed by generous exploitation in a four-dimensional search
space so that the required optimal values for α, β, v, and η can be obtained.
The efficient parametric variation for framing search space derived analytically is
[α, β, v, k] ← [(0, 1), (0, 1), (0, 1), (0, 2)]. Like most of the stochastic population-
based optimization approaches, the major effort distribution can be categorized in
two phases, like exploration versus exploitation. Eventually in exploration phase,
a high-ended abrupt randomness is imparted to find the more and more promising
regions of the search space as a set of random solutions. Contrary to this, in the
exploitation phase, steady changes are framed for various random solutions, and
consequently the random variations are made noticeably less. Both phases can be
inherently characterized by following a set of position updating expressions, as [13]:
⎧  
⎨ X t + r1 × sin(r2 ) × r3 P t − X t , r4 < 0.5,
i i i
Xi 
t+1
  (18)
⎩ X t + r1 × cos(r2 ) × r3 P t − X t , r4 ≥ 0.5,
i i i

Here, X it stands for the current position of solution at tth iteration correspondingly
in the ith dimension. Here, randomness of the exploration phase is maintained by
employing four random variables, namely, r1 , r2 , r3 and r4 . The usage selection for
both of above equations is separately governed by r4 , and hence it is random and
equi-probable. In addition, Pit stands for ith dimension’s destination point for the
corresponding tth iteration. The above expressions behave somehow in a conjugate
638 H. Singh et al.

fashion and can be combined using the uniformly distributed random variable r4
in the range of [0, 1]. The above equation expresses the core updating mechanism
ensuring both exploration as well as exploitation collectively. The random parameter
r1 governs the direction of the movement. The direction can be inside or outside the
region in-between the solution and destination. Similarly, the parameter r2 stands for
the magnitude of the movement towards or outwards the destination. The random
parameter r3 imparts a random weightage for the destination so that the effect of des-
tination in defining the distance can be introduced stochastically. The corresponding
net effect is emphasized if r3 > 1, and deemphasized if r3 < 1. At last, the parameter
r4 is solely responsible for switching exchange in-between sine- and cosine-based
conjugate equations.
It can be easily understood that the entire interim space between two solutions
can be defined through the above equations. The relative as well as absolute change
of range of sine and cosine expressions leads to the relative updating of the posi-
tion outside/inside the interim region in-between itself and another solution. The
abovementioned random position characterized by r2 is defined in the range [0, 2π ]
employed through the updating equation. Hence, this mechanism ensures the col-
lective effect of exploration as well as exploitation for the entire search space for
the corresponding dimension iteratively. It is the promising intellectual behavior to
maintain balance of exploration and exploitation, which highlights the outperfor-
mance of the optimizer. Here, assuming a constant positive integral damping factor
(a), for the tth iteration, r1 is defined in a linearly reducing fashion as [16]:

r1  a(1 − t/T ), (19)

where, t signifies the current iteration, and T stands for the total iteration count. The
resultant damping or range-reduction during the consecutive course of iterations
can be easily understood as an effect of r1 over the employed updating equation.
Also, it can be noticed the Sine-Cosine optimizer explores efficiently, when sine and
cosine function ranges in (1, 2] and [−2, 1). Correspondingly, the search space is
exploited efficiently when sine and cosine ranges in [−1, 1]. In the meantime, as the
iteration counter increases, the ranges of the sine and cosine functions are updated
to emphasize the exploitation of the available search space. The termination of this
optimizer is executed as the maximum iteration count is achieved. The entire process
flow for the proposed SCA-GCFDM approach can be summarized as shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1 Process flow diagram for the proposed SCA-GCFDM approach

A Sine-Cosine Optimizer Based Gamma Corrected Adaptive … 639

The smooth transition switching in-between exploration and exploitation phases

is the best intellectual feature through adaptive range selection for sine and cosine
functions. Best global optimal approximation achieved till now is considered as the
destination for the drifting and hence, chances of getting lost of the search agents
during the optimization, is efficiently suppressed. Finally, optimally enhanced chan-
nel is obtained and hence, correspondingly enhanced color image can be derived
as
 T  T
   

R(m, n), G(m, n), B(m, n)  THSI

RGB
H (m, n), S(m, n), I (m, n) , (20)

RGB
Here, THSI is HSI to RGB transformation process.

3 Experimentation: Performance Evaluation

and Comparison

3.1 Assessment Criterion

Performance evaluation and comparison is presented by highly relevant metrics like,

brightness (B), contrast (V), entropy (H), sharpness (S), and colorfulness (C), here.

3.2 Qualitative Assessments

Comparative qualitative evaluation with recently published state-of-the-art method-

ologies (namely, GHE, MMSICHE, ADAPHE, AVHEQ, AGCWD, HEOPC,
HEMIC, IEAUMF) is presented in Fig. 2, for highlighting the significant contri-
bution.

3.3 Quantitative Assessments

For explicit comparative numerical assessments, relevant indices are listed in Table 1.
640 H. Singh et al.

(1a) (1b) (1c) (1d) (1e)

(1f) (1g) (1h) (1i) (1j)

(2a) (2b) (2c) (2d) (2e)

(2f) (2g) (2h) (2i) (2j)

(6a) (6b) (6c) (6d) (6e)

(6f) (6g) (6h) (6i) (6j)

(4a) (4b) (4c) (4d) (4e)

Fig. 2 Visual evaluation with comparison among 1a–6a: input images [17–19]; 1b–6b: GHE [3];
1c–6c: MMSICHE [5]; 1d–6d: ADAPHE [4]; 1e–6e: AVHEQ [6]; 1f–6f: AGCWD [9]; 1g–6g:
HEOPC [7]; 1h–6h: HEMIC [8]; 1i–6i: IEAUMF [13]; and 1j–6j: the proposed approach
A Sine-Cosine Optimizer Based Gamma Corrected Adaptive … 641

(4f) (4g) (4h) (4i) (4j)

(5a) (5b) (5c) (5d) (5e)

(5f) (5g) (5h) (5i) (5j)

(6a) (6b) (6c) (6d) (6e)

(6f) (6g) (6h) (6i) (6j)

Fig. 2 (continued)

4 Conclusion

The proposed approach seems a more efficient method for information harvesting
through airborne remotely sensed dark satellite images, acquired under poor illumina-
tion. An efficient exploration of search space using Sine-Cosine optimizer leads to the
higher efficacy of the proposed textural enhancement along with proper edge restora-
tion. Thus, overall quality enhancement is imparted through optimal decision making
of the fractional differentiation order by employing this approach. Entire allowable
intensity span must be exploited so that the count of the void bins can be reduced and
hence, cost function is framed by introducing this void-bin count as a penalty term
along with desired assurance for entropy as well as contrast enhancement. Rigorous
experimentation is executed by employing the performance evaluation and compari-
son with preexisting recently proposed and highly appreciated quality enhancement
Table 1 Quantitative evaluation with comparison among input images [17–19], GHE [3], MMSICHE [5], ADAPHE [4], AVHEQ [6], AGCWD [9], HEOPC
642

[7], HEMIC [8], IEAUMF [13], and the proposed approach using various metrics termed as Brightness (B), Contrast (V), Entropy (H), Sharpness (S) and
Colorfulness (C)
S. No INDICES INPUT GHE MMISCHE ADAPHE AVHEQ AGCWD HEOPC HEMIC IEUMF Proposed
1 B 0.2573 0.5004 0.2955 0.4104 0.3193 0.4243 0.322 0.3849 0.3237 0.3994
V 0.0304 0.0859 0.0596 0.0623 0.0492 0.063 0.0461 0.052 0.0501 0.0798
H 6.8359 7.2603 7.0938 7.4255 7.0964 7.1282 6.9724 7.2701 7.0812 7.2519
S 0.299 0.513 0.3982 0.6406 0.3803 0.4353 0.3694 0.4034 0.462 0.6923
C 0.1264 0.267 0.1352 0.2081 0.156 0.2267 0.16 0.2016 0.1592 0.2314
2 B 0.106 0.5019 0.1573 0.3226 0.1253 0.3337 0.1294 0.2186 0.14 0.3899
V 0.0076 0.0846 0.0408 0.0431 0.012 0.0655 0.0102 0.015 0.0191 0.1195
H 5.5645 6.7583 6.0061 6.8852 5.749 6.547 5.7736 6.3054 5.8876 6.8342
S 0.2513 1.0145 0.4821 0.6922 0.318 0.8437 0.2956 0.406 0.4206 1.0147
C 0.0489 0.2549 0.0652 0.1576 0.0572 0.1586 0.0602 0.1113 0.0619 0.2275
3 B 0.2232 0.526 0.2581 0.3636 0.2893 0.3759 0.2651 0.3477 0.3006 0.4115
V 0.044 0.0669 0.0723 0.0881 0.0421 0.0855 0.0355 0.0485 0.0621 0.1263
H 5.9635 6.3469 6.3378 6.5588 7.2381 6.1279 7.1482 7.3685 7.2859 7.4428
S 0.6581 0.8567 0.8033 1.0538 0.5041 0.9919 0.5082 0.5637 0.7700 1.2690
C 0.1328 0.3077 0.1481 0.2312 0.1615 0.2414 0.1497 0.1984 0.1827 0.3231
(continued)
H. Singh et al.
Table 1 (continued)
S. No INDICES INPUT GHE MMISCHE ADAPHE AVHEQ AGCWD HEOPC HEMIC IEUMF Proposed
4 B 0.3519 0.501 0.3787 0.4778 0.6367 0.5218 0.4485 0.528 0.4671 0.7297
V 0.0094 0.0859 0.0339 0.0531 0.0544 0.0345 0.0183 0.0294 0.0573 0.0603
H 6.88 7.2077 7.0756 7.4709 7.6275 7.2984 7.2257 7.4517 7.5047 7.7535
S 0.2415 0.7182 0.4474 0.6778 0.5638 0.4524 0.337 0.4254 0.8688 1.0363
C 0.2126 0.3204 0.2288 0.3076 0.3684 0.3169 0.2687 0.3135 0.295 0.6587
5 B 0.0612 0.6079 0.1259 0.1842 0.2692 0.182 0.1235 0.4127 0.1234 0.2399
V 0.0071 0.0322 0.0542 0.0463 0.1188 0.0415 0.0281 0.0433 0.0305 0.0607
H 3.0107 3.8806 3.2498 4.0203 3.354 3.2902 3.8289 4.4715 3.34 4.6541
S 0.2812 0.6202 0.698 0.7238 1.1706 0.713 0.5694 0.6471 0.5945 0.8954
C 0.0875 0.5103 0.2138 0.2477 0.3768 0.2425 0.1658 0.455 0.1703 0.3743
6 B 0.1446 0.526 0.1752 0.3212 0.1939 0.3186 0.1811 0.4248 0.1871 0.4314
V 0.032 0.0668 0.0569 0.0735 0.057 0.0765 0.0489 0.0501 0.0569 0.1787
H 5.2964 6.1069 5.6815 6.2404 5.4922 5.7146 5.586 6.3627 5.488 6.3487
S 0.4526 0.8683 0.561 0.9733 0.6203 0.9196 0.5558 0.6105 0.666 1.2664
C 0.1228 0.3483 0.1602 0.2345 0.1672 0.2513 0.1521 0.2781 0.1618 0.3732
A Sine-Cosine Optimizer Based Gamma Corrected Adaptive …
643
644 H. Singh et al.

approaches. Finally, outperformance of this approach can be explicitly identified on

the quantitative basis using highly relevant performance measures.

References

1. Singh, H., Kumar, A., Balyan, L.K., Singh, G.K.: A novel optimally weighted framework of
piecewise gamma corrected fractional order masking for satellite image enhancement. Comput.
Electr. Eng. 1–17 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2017.11.014
2. Singh, H., Kumar, A., Balyan, L.K., Singh, G.K.: Swarm intelligence optimized piecewise
gamma corrected histogram equalization for dark image enhancement. Comput. Electr. Eng.
1–14 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2017.06.029
3. Gonzalez, R.C., Woods, R.E.: Digital image processing, 3rd edn. (2007)
4. Zuiderveld, K.: VIII.5. Contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization. Graph. Gems 474–485
(1994).https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-336156-1.50061-6
5. Singh, K., Kapoor, R.: Image enhancement via median-mean based sub-image-clipped his-
togram equalization. Optik (Stuttg) 125, 4646–4651 (2014)
6. Lin, S.C.F., Wong, C.Y., Rahman, M.A., et al.: Image enhancement using the averaging his-
togram equalization approach for contrast improvement and brightness preservation. Comput.
Electr. Eng. 46, 356–370 (2014)
7. Wong, C.Y., Jiang, G., Rahman, M.A., Liu, S., Lin, S.C.F., Kwok, N., Shi, H., Yu, Y.H., Wu,
T.: Histogram equalization and optimal profile compression based approach for colour image
enhancement. J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent. 38, 802–813 (2016)
8. Wong, C.Y., Liu, S., Liu, S.C., Rahman, A., Lin, C., Jiang, G., Kwok, N., Shi, H.: Image contrast
enhancement using histogram equalization with maximum intensity coverage. J. Modern Opt.
63(16), 1618–1629 (2016)
9. Huang, S.C., Cheng, F.C., Chiu, Y.S.: Efficient contrast enhancement using adaptive gamma
correction with weighting distribution. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 22, 1032–1041 (2013)
10. Singh, H., Kumar, A.: Satellite image enhancement using beta wavelet based gamma corrected
adaptive knee transformation. In: IEEE International Conference Communication and Signal
Processing (ICCSP), India, pp. 128–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2017.06.029
(2016)
11. Singh, H., Agrawal, N., Kumar, A., Singh, G.K., Lee, H.N.: A novel gamma correction approach
using optimally clipped sub-equalization for dark image enhancement. In: IEEE International
Conference Digital Signal Process (DSP) 2016, China, pp. 497–501. https://doi.org/10.1109/i
cdsp.2016.7868607 (2016)
12. Singh, H., Kumar, A., Balyan, L.K., Singh, G.K.: A novel optimally gamma corrected intensity
span maximization approach for dark image enhancement. In: IEEE International Conference
Digital Signal Process (DSP) 2017, London, United Kingdom, pp. 1–5. https://doi.org/10.110
9/icdsp.2017.8096035 (2017)
13. Lin, S.C.F., Wong, C.Y., Jiang, G., Rahman, M.A., Ren, T.R., Kwok, N., Shi, H., Yu, Y.H.,
Wu, T.: Intensity and edge based adaptive unsharp masking filter for color image enhancement.
Optik (Stuttg) 127, 407–414 (2016)
14. Singh, H., Kumar, A., Balyan, L.K., Singh, G.K.: Regionally equalized and contextually clipped
gamma correction approach for dark image enhancement. In: IEEE International Conference
Signal Process. Integrated Networks (SPIN), India, pp. 431–436. https://doi.org/10.1109/spin.
2017.8049988 (2017)
15. Pu, Y.F., Zhou, J.L., Yuan, X.: Fractional differential mask: a fractional differential-based
approach for multiscale texture enhancement. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 19(2), 491–511
(2010)
16. Mirjalili, S.: SCA: a sine cosine algorithm for solving optimization problems. Knowl.-Based
Syst. 96, 120–133 (2016)
A Sine-Cosine Optimizer Based Gamma Corrected Adaptive … 645

17. NASA Visible Earth: Home. http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/ (2017). Accessed on 2 June 2017
18. SATPALDA. http://www.satpalda.com/gallery/ (2017). Accessed on 2 June 2017
19. CRISP. http://www.crisp.nus.edu.sg/ (2017). Accessed on 2 June 2017