Processing math: 100%

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Rudin-Osher-Fatemi image denoising model


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:ΩR, 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|fu|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)+λfu2L2(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.
0uJ(uλ)+uH(uλ,f).
(here subdifferential uJ at uλ is the set uJ(uλ):={v:J(u)J(uλ)+v,uuλ}. )

If H(u,f)=λfu2L2(Ω), then uH(u,f)=2λ(uf). Moreover if H(u,f)=λfKu2L2(Ω), where K:L2(Ω)H, H being some Hilbert space, then uH(u,f)=2λK(Kuf), 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(uf) or equivalently,
u=f+12λdiv(u|u|)
We impose Neumann boundary condition uν=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
We see above that for this λ=0.8 the denoising is minimal.


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 wBV(Ω) we have:
|uλ|BV(Ω)+λfuλ2L2(Ω)|w|BV(Ω)+λfw2L2(Ω).This is true even if we choose w0, which gives us:|uλ|BV(Ω)+λfuλ2L2(Ω)λf2L2(Ω).As 0|uλ|BV(Ω) we have:fuλ2L2(Ω)f2L2(Ω).By expanding the L2 term and using Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we get Ωf22fuλ+u2λΩf2,Ωu2λΩ2fuλ2uλL2(Ω)fL2(Ω),uλL2(Ω)2fL2(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,g2L(R2)}.
The star-norm v of vG is defined as follows:
v=inf{|ˉg|l2L:v=div ˉg}

3. If vL2(R2), then
fv|f|BV(Ω)v.
This property is true for fW1,1(R2). Then we can use the density of W1,1(R2) in BV(R2).

4. Meyer: If f12λ, 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 f12λ, 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.

3 comments:

  1. 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

    on 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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. see page 565 of http://www.cscamm.umd.edu/people/faculty/tadmor/pub/image_processing/MultiscaleBVL2_TNV2004MMS.pdf

      Delete
  2. Sorry, for the long wait. I did not work on the blog for a while. About the paper ∂f/∂y is not correct.

    ReplyDelete