Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Term Paper On The Compressive Sensing Based On Biorthogonal Wavelet Basis
Term Paper On The Compressive Sensing Based On Biorthogonal Wavelet Basis
Submitted By:
Amrita Mishra 11104163
Manoj C 11104059
INTRODUCTION:
COMPRESSIVE SENSING
2. Since the dimension of vector of the acquired samples y is ‗substantially‘ smaller than
the dimension of the signal, we obviously obtain some initial compression, which can
be further augmented by applying lossy or lossless compression to the vector y.
3. Similarly to standard transform-based compression techniques, the paradigm of CS is
based on the assumption that the signal x has a sparse representation in some basis
such as wavelets. This means that we assume that there exists a known fixed
transform T, such that from the N (or more) transform coefficients c = Tx , only k < n
coefficients are significant. Working under this ‗sparsity‘ assumption an
approximation to x can be reconstructed from y by ‗sparsity‘ minimization, such as 1 l
minimization
A key assumption in the theory of CS is that the sampling process determined by the matrix
Φand the sparsity transform T are ‗incoherent‘. Roughly speaking, this means that if a signal
has a sparse representation in one, then it must have a dense representation in the other and
visa versa, but a signal cannot have a sparse representation in both.
Figure 1: (a) Sparse wavelet representation of an image. Black- significant coefficient, white
– insignificant coefficient (b) JPEG2000 compressed image based on the sparse
representation of (a)
The discrete wavelet transform can be represented in matrix form as equation, where Ψ is a
matrix with columns corresponding to othonormal scaling and wavelet basis vectors. The
functions that qualify as orthonormal wavelets, such as Daubechies wavelets, lack desirable
symmetry properties. The Biorthogonal wavelets use two different wavelet bases, ψ(x) and
. One is used for decomposition (analysis) and the other one for reconstruction
(synthesis) i.e
We then have,
for decomposition
and
for reconstruction.
The two scaling functions given in the frequency domain are
and
where
The biorthogonal wavelets for the forward two-dimentional transform are given as
A wavelet coefficient has a small value, then its children coefficients are likely to also
negligible. The statistics of the wavelet coefficients may be represented by the hidden
Markov tree. The structure of the wavelet tree is exploited explicitly. Each wavelet
coefficient is assumed to be drawn from one of two zero-mean Gaussian distributions in
hidden Markov tree. These distributions define the observation statistics for two hidden
states. One of the states is a ―low‖ state, defined by a small Gaussian variance. And the
―high‖ state is defined by a large variance. If a wavelet coefficient is relatively small, it is
more likely to reside in the ―low‖ state. A large wavelet coefficient has a high probability of
coming from the ―high‖state.
We do not get the wavelet coefficients directly in compressive sensing. We only get
the projections of these coefficients. The form of the hidden Markov tree will be used in the
compressive sensing inversion. If a given coefficient is negligible, we can scale its children
coefficients as ―zero‖. The subtrees of these wavelet coefficients may all be set to zero with
a little effect on the reconstruction accuracy.
Experiment:
We performed compressive sampling on the standard Lena image. Due to
computational limitations, we resized the Lena image to 64×64 pixels and performed
compressive sampling on the resized image. The original Lena image used is shown in Figure
4. The experiments were carried out in MATLAB 7.11.0 running on PC with Intel® Core™ i7
2.93 GHz CPU with 4 GB RAM.
Results:
The experimental results obtained by compressing the Lena image using CVX are
shown in Table 1. The performance indicators time taken in seconds, PSNR in dB and the
reconstructed image are tabulated. As expected, the PSNR and the image quality increase as
the number of measurements increases. Among the several wavelets considered, we can
observe that the biorthogonal wavelets give a good reconstruction. The time taken for
reconstruction of biorthogonal 3.5 wavelets is the least compared to other wavelets.
We also performed the same experiment using l1-regularised least squares solver
(l1_ls) to reconstruct the image from compressed samples. The results corresponding to l1_ls
are tabulated in Table 2.
Table 2: Experimental results obtained using l1-regularised least squares solver.
No. of
haar db4 db6 db8 bior2.8 bior3.5
measurements
Time 142 178 231 178 168 375
PSNR 14.30 14.27 14.58 14.24 13.69 14.61
750
Image
We can observe that l1_s gives better performance in terms of both PSNR and time
taken. We also conclude that the compression performance depends on the solver used to
reconstruct the image from the compressed samples. This is the reason why the performance
observed is different from that given in the paper.
Contribution:
The reconstructed image is not of very good quality when number of measurements is
less. So, we tried denoising the image with by applying Total Variation denoising. Total
variation denoising was applied on images reconstructed using l1_ls only and the results are
shown in Table 3.
From the results, we can infer that the total variation filtering improves the image
quality and PSNR when number of measurements taken is less. The improvement in PSNR is
around 1-2 dB. When the number of measurements increases, the image reconstructed is
almost similar to the original image. So, the total variation filtering has resulted in blurring of
the image, resulting in a decreased PSNR. Since compression and compressive sampling aim
at reducing the number of measurements taken, number of measurements taken in practice is
very less. So, the PSNR can be increased by using denoising after reconstructing the image.
Conclusion:
In this paper, we test the quality of Haar, db4, db6, db8,bior2.8 and bior3.5 wavelet
basis for the implementation of CS and it is observed that Biorthogonal wavelets given a
better reconstruction. We used both CVX and l1-regularised least squares optimizer (in
MATLAB) to perform the optimisation step in CS and observe that l1-regularised least
squares optimizer gave better performance with respect to both PSNR and time taken. We
observed that the reconstructed image is not of very good quality when number of
measurements is less. So, we tried denoising the image with by applying Total Variation
denoising (results provided only for l1-regularised least squares optimized images) and
observed the PSNR can be increased by using denoising after reconstructing the image. We
also concluded that the type of wavelet basis used in CS depends upon the image to be
compressed. For an image with more details like Lena, the best performance was achieved for
Biorthogonal Wavelets. It can be seen that for a image with fewer details other wavelets like
Daubechies also do a fair job. Even the number of pixels required for proper reconstruction
would be less for an image with fewer details.