Today we will finally touch the subject of the celebrated image denoising model proposed by Rudin, Osher and Fatemi in 1992, ( L. Rudin, S. Osher, E. Fatemi, "Nonlinear total variation based noise removal algorithms", Physica D, vol. 60, pp. 259–268, 1992.)
This model is motivated by the following problem in image restoration:
Given a noisy image f:Ω→R, where Ω is bounded open subset of R2, we need to obtain a clean image u.
For solving this problem they proposed the following minimization problem:
minimize ∫Ω|∇u| subject to ∫Ωu=∫Ωf and ∫Ω|f−u|2=σ2. where σ2 is the estimated global variance of the additive noise. This can be also formulated in terms of soft constraint minimization:
uλ=argminu{|u|BV(Ω)+λ‖f−u‖2L2(Ω)}. where |u|BV(Ω) is the BV-seminorm.
In general, this belongs to the class of minimization problems of the following type
uλ=argminu{J(u)+H(f,u)} where J is a convex nonnegative regularization functional and the fitting functional H is convex nonnegative with respect to u for fixed f. Due to convexity there exists a minimizer uλ such that '0' is in the sub-differential of J(u)+H(f,u) at uλ i.e.
0∈∂uJ(uλ)+∂uH(uλ,f).
(here subdifferential ∂uJ at uλ is the set ∂uJ(uλ):={v:J(u)≥J(uλ)+⟨v,u−uλ⟩}. )
If H(u,f)=λ‖f−u‖2L2(Ω), then ∂uH(u,f)=2λ(u−f). Moreover if H(u,f)=λ‖f−Ku‖2L2(Ω), where K:L2(Ω)→H, H being some Hilbert space, then ∂uH(u,f)=2λK∗(Ku−f), where K∗ denotes an adjoint of K.
Formally, we can write ∂J(u)=−div(∇u|∇u|), and we can write the Euler-Lagrange differential equation for the Rudin Osher Fatemi model as follows:
0=−div(∇u|∇u|)+2λ(u−f) or equivalently,
u=f+12λdiv(∇u|∇u|)
We impose Neumann boundary condition ∇u⋅ν=0 in the boundary ∂Ω, this ensures the condition on the mean: ∫Ωu=∫Ωf.
Dependence on the scaling parameter λ:
The parameter λ determines the denoising level. If λ is small, then it is equivalent to penalizing the fidelity term more and the minimizer uλ is very close to the original image. On the other hand, for large λ the minimizer is a cartoon representation of the image f.
We perform a few experiments on the image of Lenna:
![]() |
Original image, Lena. |
For λ=0.8 and the image in the range [0, 255] we get the following result:
![]() |
The denoised image uλ for λ=0.8 |
For λ=0.05 and the image in the range [0, 255] we get the following result:
![]() |
The denoised image uλ for λ=0.05. |
Here we see the details are gone, but we still see a lot of structure. Let's see what happens if we take λ=0.01, with image in [0, 255].
![]() |
The denoised image uλ for λ=0.01. |
We here see that we get only a cartoon image of Lena. In other words we get only large-scale structures in the image of Lena.
Properties of the ROF denoising:
Let us look at some properties of the ROF model now.
1. The L2-norm of the minimizer uλ is bounded, and the bound is independent of λ.
This nice property can be proven (Nezzar) by realizing that uλ is a minimizer of the ROF functional, thus for any w∈BV(Ω) we have:
|uλ|BV(Ω)+λ‖f−uλ‖2L2(Ω)≤|w|BV(Ω)+λ‖f−w‖2L2(Ω).This is true even if we choose w≡0, which gives us:|uλ|BV(Ω)+λ‖f−uλ‖2L2(Ω)≤λ‖f‖2L2(Ω).As 0≤|uλ|BV(Ω) we have:‖f−uλ‖2L2(Ω)≤‖f‖2L2(Ω).By expanding the L2 term and using Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we get ∫Ωf2−2fuλ+u2λ≤∫Ωf2,∫Ωu2λ≤∫Ω2fuλ≤2‖uλ‖L2(Ω)‖f‖L2(Ω),‖uλ‖L2(Ω)≤2‖f‖L2(Ω).
2. The average of the minimizer uλ is the same as the average of the original image f.
To prove this it suffices to prove that ∫Ωuλ=∫Ωf. This follows from integrating the Euler-Lagrange differential equation and Neumann boundary condition.
Now let us discuss properties of the ROF minimization proven by Yves Meyer. Let's define a few things first.
Definition: Let G denote the space as follows G={v=div ˉg:ˉg=(g1,g2); with g1,g2∈L∞(R2)}.
The star-norm ‖v‖∗ of v∈G is defined as follows:
‖v‖∗=inf{‖|ˉg|l2‖L∞:v=div ˉg}
3. If v∈L2(R2), then
∫fv≤|f|BV(Ω)‖v‖∗.
This property is true for f∈W1,1(R2). Then we can use the density of W1,1(R2) in BV(R2).
4. Meyer: If ‖f‖∗≥12λ, then the Rudin-Osher-Fatemi decomposition f=uλ+vλ is characterized by the following two conditions:‖vλ‖∗=12λ and ∫uλvλ=12λ|uλ|BV.
Moreover, if ‖f‖∗≤12λ, then uλ=0 and vλ=f.
To prove this assertion, consider that if uλ is the minimizer of the ROF energy then uλ+ϵh is not! for a constant ϵ and a function h. This gives |∫vh|≤12λ|h|BV. Secondly, taking h=uλ we obtain equality.
Hi, I am a rookie, I was confused about ∂J(u)=−div(∇u|∇u|), please take a look at "Total Variation Image Edge Detection", http://www.wseas.us/e-library/conferences/2011/Cambridge/NEHIPISIC/NEHIPISIC-42.pdf
ReplyDeleteon page 248 the upper left corner, how did he get the ∂f/∂y, I am lost in the mixed function derivation, please give me a hand, thank you
see page 565 of http://www.cscamm.umd.edu/people/faculty/tadmor/pub/image_processing/MultiscaleBVL2_TNV2004MMS.pdf
DeleteSorry, for the long wait. I did not work on the blog for a while. About the paper ∂f/∂y is not correct.
ReplyDelete