A Novel Approach For Image De-Noising Using Wavelets

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 2, March April 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
A NOVEL APPROACH FOR IMAGE DENOISING USING WAVELETS

Tajinder Singh1, Rajeev Bedi2
1,2
Beant College of Engineering & Technology, Gurdaspur.
Abstract: Wavelet thresholding is an admired move toward

the de-noising, due to its unfussiness. This procedure operates in the orthogonal wavelet domain, where every coefficient is thresholded by comparing adjacent to a threshold. Because the information, which is transmitted in the form of digital images, is obsequious for Visual information, which is becoming a major means of communication in the recent era. But the image obtain after diffusion is often tarnished with noise. The received image demands processing before it can be used in applications. Image de-noising involves the manipulation of the image data to construct a visually high quality image. This p a p e r defined a proposed approach for image den o i s i n g a n d the existing de-noising algorithms, such as Donoho Soft & Hard Thresholding De-noising, Standard wavelet de-noising, Baysian Thresholding de-noising, Bayes Shrinkage De-noising, and BLS De-noising for their comparative study. A quantitative measure of comparison is provided by the different parameter such as PSNR, MSE, and MAE of the image. By implementing the proposed approached we capture less time complexity as compare to the existing techniques having better result for MSE, MAE & PSNR.
a Gaussian distribution, which has a bell shaped probability distribution function given by
F g Figure 1 Gaussian distribution Where g represent the gray level, m is the mean or average of the function and is the standard deviation of the noise. Graphically, it is represented as shown in Figure 2.1. When introduced into an image, Gaussian noise with zero mean and variance as 0.05 would look as in Figure 1. 2.2 Salt and Pepper Noise Salt and pepper noise is an impulse variety of noise, which is also referred to as intensity spikes. This is caused usually due to errors in data transmission. It has only two possible values, a and b. The probability of each is characteristically less than 0.1. The corrupted pixels are set alternatively to the minimum or to the maximum value, giving the image a salt and pepper like manifestation. Unaffected pixels remain unbothered. For an 8-bit image, the typical value for pepper noise is 0 and for salt noise 255. The salt and pepper noise is generally caused by faulty of pixel elements in the camera sensors, faulty memory locations, or timing errors in the digitization process. The probability density function for this type of noise is shown in Figure 2.
Keywords: De-noising, thresholding, SAR, symlet, PSNR, MSE, MAE.
1. INTRODUCTION
Noise is undesired information that contaminates the image. Noise is present in an image either in an additive or multiplicative form. An additive noise follows the rule w( x, y) = s( x, y) + n( x, y), While the multiplicative noise satisfies, w( x, y) = s( x, y) * n( x, y) , where s(x,y) is the original signal, n(x,y) denotes the noise introduced into the signal to produce the corrupted image w(x,y), and (x,y) represents the pixel location. The above image algebra is done at pixel level. By image multiplication, we mean the brightness of the image is speckled.
2. TYPES OF NOISE 2.1 Gaussian Noise

Gaussian noise is evenly scattered over the signal. This means that each pixel in the noisy image is the sum of the true pixel value and a random Gaussian distributed noise value. As the name indicates, this type of noise has Volume 2, Issue 2 March April 2013
Figure 2
Probability Density Function
Page 35

2.3 Speckle Noise Speckle noise is a multiplicative noise. This type of noise occurs in almost all coherent imaging systems such as laser, acoustics and SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) descriptions. The source of this noise is attributed to random interference between the coherent returns. Fully developed speckle noise has the characteristic of multiplicative noise. Speckle noise follows a gamma distribution and is given as energy does not. It is this important principle that enables the separation of signal from noise. The procedure in which small coefficients are removed while others are left untouched is called Hard Thresholding [5]. But the hard thresholding includes some demerits so to overcome the demerits of hard thresholding, wavelet transform using soft thresholding was also introduced in [5]. In this scheme, coefficients above the threshold are shrunk by the absolute value of the threshold itself. Similar to soft thresholding, other techniques of applying thresholds are semi-soft thresholding and Garrote thresholding [6]. Most of the wavelet shrinkage literature is based on methods for choosing the optimal threshold which can be adaptive or non-adaptive to the image.
Where variance is a2 and g is the gray level. On an image, speckle noise (with variance 0.05) looks as shown in Fig 2.4 [Im01]. The gamma distribution is given below in Figure .3.
Figure 3 Gamma Distribution
3. WAVELET DOMAIN
3.1 Filters In wavelet Filtering progression can be separated in two categories Linear Nonlinear Linear Filters Linear filters such as Wiener filter in the wavelet domain give up optimal results when the signal corruption can be modeled as a Gaussian process and the accuracy measure is the mean square error (MSE) [14, 15]. However, scheming a filter based on this assumption frequently results in a filtered image that is more visually displeasing than the original noisy signal, even though the filtering operation successfully reduces the MSE. Non-Linear Threshold Filtering The most investigated domain in de-noising using Wavelet Transform is the non-linear coefficient thresholding based methods. The procedure exploits sparsity property of the wavelet transform and the fact that the Wavelet Transform maps white noise in the signal domain to white noise in the transform domain. Thus, while signal energy becomes more concentrated into fewer coefficients in the transform domain, noise Volume 2, Issue 2 March April 2013
Figure 4 Image De-noising Methods
4. ROLE OF FILTERS IN IMAGE DE-NOISING

Filters play a major role in the image restoration process. Let w(x) be the input signal subjected to filtering, and z(x) be the filtered output. If the filter satisfies certain conditions such as linearity and shift invariance, then the output filter can be expressed mathematically in simple form as z(x) = w(t)h(x t)dt (1) where h(t) is called the point spread function or impulse response and is a function that completely characterizes the filter. For a discrete case, the integral turns into a summation as z(i)= (2) Although the limits on the summation in Equation (2) are , the function h(t) is usually zero outside some range. If Page 36

the range over which h(t) is non-zero is (-k, +k), then the above Equation (2) can be written as z(i)= (3) This means that the output z(i) at point i is given by a weighted sum of input pixels surrounding i where the weights are given by h(t). To create the output at the next pixel i+1, the function h(t) is shifted by one and the weighted sum is recomputed. The total output is created by a series of shift-multiply-sum operations, and this forms a discrete convolution. For the 2-dimensional case, h(t) is h(t,u), and Equation (3) becomes z(i, j)= (4) Values of h(t,u) are referred to as the filter weights, the filter kernel, or filter mask. For reasons of symmetry h(t,u) is always chosen to be of size mn where m and n are both odd (often m=n). In physical systems, the kernel h(t,u) must always be non-negative which results in some blurring or averaging of the image. If the coefficients are alternating positive and negative, the mask is a filter that returns edge information only. 5. WAVELET DE-NOISING In wavelet De-noising firstly apply Discrete Wavelet Transform using Standard wavelet symlet upto 2 level decomposition which is as shown in Fig 5(a). 2. Different types of Noises are introduced into the original image. Such as Salt and Pepper Noise, Speckle Noise and Gaussian Noise. Various De-noising techniques like Donoho (Hard & Soft Thresholding), BLS, along with proposed method is applied to the test image . 3. For the verifications of result a comparative study between various De-noising methods is made which is based upon two performance metrics namely Peak Signal to Noise Ratio (PSNR) and Mean Square error(MSE), Mean Absolute Error(MAE), Simulation Time (Time Complexity).
7. RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS (SALT PEPPER NOISE)
AND
Figure 6 Original Image
Figure 5(a) Lena: Original Image
Figure 6.1 Noisy version of Camera man
Figure 5(b) Lena: Two-Level Decomposition of DWT by Symlet
6. PROPOSED APPROACH
1. First of all a image is randomly selected from a data base of 4-5 images.
Figure 6.2 De-Noised by using Wavelet David Donoho Soft Thresholding De-Noising , Noise Type= Salt and Pepper Noise Noise Variance () = 0.1 Page 37
Volume 2, Issue 2 March April 2013

Figure 6.3 De-Noised by using Wavelet David Donoho Hard Thresholding De-Noising , Noise Type= Salt and Pepper Noise Noise Variance () = 0.1 Figure 6.7 BLS De-Noising, Noise Type= Salt and Pepper Noise Noise Variance () = 0.1
Figure 6.4 De-Noised by using Wavelet Thresholding, Noise Type= Salt and Pepper Noise Noise Variance () = 0.1
Figure 6.8 Proposed Approach. Noise Type= Salt and Pepper Noise Noise Variance () = 0.1 8. SIMULATION RESULTS 8.1 MSE (Mean Square Error)
Figure 6.5 Basian De-Noising,. Noise Type= Salt and Pepper Noise Noise Variance () = 0.1
Figure 7 MSE Representation ( Standard Deviation for Salt and Pepper Noise OF Cameraman 256X256) In figure the MSE (Mean Square Error) is calculated w.r.t standard deviation of Salt and Ppepper noise applied to the noiseless image . It is very clear from the plot the significant improvement in MSE value which is obtained with the use of proposed technique over the other techniques which is already explained in the above section of paper. Page 38
Figure 6.6 Bayes Shrinkage De-Noising, Noise Type= Salt and Pepper Noise Noise Variance () = 0.1 Volume 2, Issue 2 March April 2013

8.2 PSNR (Peak Signal to Noise Ratio) Representation Table 1 PSNR, MSE,MAE,Time Complexity for Salt and pepper Noise.
Sr. No
Noise Variance ()
Donoho Soft Thresholding PSNR MSE MAE Time Complexity 0.021656 0.022811 0.021036 0.020917
1 2 3 4
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5
70.5281 72.4072 71.0261 68.3212
0.0058 0.0037 0.0051 0.0096
0.0638 0.0774 0.0954 0.1326
Table 2 PSNR, MSE,MAE,Time Complexity for Salt and pepper Noise.

Donoho Hard Thresholding PSNR 68.0768 69.1132 71.0161 68.3212 MSE 0.0101 0.008 0.0051 0.0096 MAE 0.0707 0.1007 0.0954 0.1326 Time Complexity 0.019798 0.019695 0.018545 0.019427
Figure 8 PSNR (in db) Vs Standard deviation() Factor for Cameraman(256x256) image In figure PSNR is calculated w.r.t standard deviation of salt and pepper noise applied to the noiseless image. It is very clear from the plot the significant improvement in PSNR value that is obtained with the use of proposed technique over the other techniques. 8.3 Graphical Representation of MAE (Mean Average Error) In figure differentiate the Existing approach and proposed approach where MAE is calculated w.r.t standard deviation of salt and pepper noise applied to the noiseless image. It is very clear from the plot the significant improvement in MAE value that is obtained with the use of proposed technique over the other techniques.
Sr. No
Noise Variance () 0.1
1 0.2 2 0.3 3 4 0.5

Sr . N o 1 2 3 4 Noise Variance () 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 Standard Wavelet Thresholding PSNR 68.0369 67.5159 70.3563 68.1966 MSE 0.0102 0.0115 0.0060 0.0098 MAE 0.0622 0.1178 0.0984 0.1333 Time Complexit y 0.01937 0.02091 0.018892 0.019396

Sr. No 1 2 3 Noise Variance () 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 Bayes Shrinkage Denoising PSNR 68.2475 71.0291 71.026 68.3212 MSE 0.0097 0.0051 0.0051 0.0096 MAE 0.0719 0.0842 0.0954 0.1326 Time Complexity 0.018837 0.019806 0.019124 0.018919
Figure 9 MAE Vs Standard deviation () Factor for Cameraman(256x256) image 9. PROPOSED APPROACH VS EXISTING APPROACHES NOISE VARIANCE ()
Volume 2, Issue 2 March April 2013
Page 39

Noise Variance () 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 BLS De-noising PSNR 72.3354 71.1306 70.9456 68.2827 MSE 0.0038 0.0053 0.0052 0.0097 MAE 0.0761 0.0889 0.0956 0.1328 Time Complexity 0.019183 0.019173 0.018838 0.018703
Signal to Noise Ratio), MSE (Mean Square Error), MAR(Mean Average Error) and Time complexity has been improved as compare to the Existing approaches..
Sr. No 1 2 3 4
1 1 . FUTURE SCOPE
As future research, we would like to work further on the comparison of the de-noising techniques on color images as well. It can also be extended in which the denoised signals can be fed into Neural Networks pattern reorganization as well. By this way, rate of successful classification should determine the ultimate measure by which to compare various de-noising procedures. These two points would be considered as an extension to
Table 6 PSNR, MSE,MAE,Time Complexity for Salt and pepper Noise

Noise Variance
the present work done. REFERENCES

[1] Aliaa A.A.Youssif Adaptive Algorithm for Image Denoising Based on Curvelet Threshold IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.10 No.1, January 2010. [2] A. Buades, B. Coll, and J. Morel, Neighborhood Filters and PDEs, Numerische Mathematik, 105, No. 1,pp. 1-34,2006. [3] A.Pizurica, W.Philips, I.Lemahieu, and M.Acheroy, A joint inter- and intrascale statistical model for bayesian wavelet based image denoising," IEEE Trans. on ImageProc., vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 724-735, 2002. [4] Babak Nasersharif, Ahmad Akbari,Application of Wavelet Transform and Wavelet Thresholding in Robust Subband Speech Recognition, 12th European Signal Processing Conferences (EUSIPCO), pp. 345-348, 2004 ,Vienna,Austria. [5] G.Fan and X.Xia, Wavelet-based texture analysis and synthesis using hidden markov models," IEEE Trans. Circuits and Systems I: Fundamental theory and applications, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 106-120, 2003. [6] J.L.Starck, E.J.Candes, and D.L.Donoho, The curvelet transform for image denoising," IEEE Trans. on Image Proc., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 670- 684, 2002. [7] J.Portilla, V.Strela, M.Wainwright, and E.Simoncelli, Image denoising using scale mixtures of gaussians in the wavelet domain," IEEE Trans. Image Proc., vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 1338-1351, 2003. [8] Kashif Rajpoot, Nasir Rajpoot and J. Alison Noble, Discrete Wavelet Diffusion for Image Denoising IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 12 2006.
Sr. No 1 2 3 4
Basian Thresholding PSNR 68.2762 69.8752 71.0206 68.3212 MSE 0.0097 0.0067 0.0051 0.0096 MAE 0.0693 0.094 0.0954 0.1326 Time Complexity 0.018763 0.019098 0.018977 0.018882
() 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5

Sr. No 1 2 3 4 Noise Variance () 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 Proposed Approach PSNR 78.4021 76.0529 71.3802 68.6033 MSE
0.00093
MAE 0.0498 0.1044 0.095 0.1326
Time Complexity 0.018132 0.019275 0.018722 0.018040
0.0016 0.0047 0.0090
10. CONCLUSION
From the investigational and mathematical results it can be concluded that for salt and pepper noise (Speckle Noise and Gaussian Noise as well), the median filter is optimal compared to Mean Filter and LMS adaptive filter. It produces the ceiling SNR for the output image compared to the linear filters considered. The LMS adaptive filter proves to be better than the mean filter but has more time complexity. From the output images shown in a bove gi ven r esul t s the image obtained from the modified median filter gives a fine quality of image which is close to the high quality image. Denoising salt and pepper noise using proposed method has proved to be efficient due to adaptive median filter used in it. It does a superior job in de-noising images that are highly irregular and are corrupted with noise that has a complex nature. We conclude that the proposed approach gives the paramount results as PSNR(Peak Volume 2, Issue 2 March April 2013
Page 40

[9] Mukesh C. Motwani, Mukesh C. Gadiya, Rakhi C. Motwani, Frederick C. Harris, Jr, (2004) Survey of Image Denoising Techniques, Proc. of GSPx 2004, Santa Clara Convention Center, Santa Clara, CA, pp. 27-30. [10] N.Kingsbury, Image processing with complex wavelets," Phil. Trans. Royal Society London A, vol. 357, pp. 2543-2560,1999. [11] Pankaj Hedaoo and Swati S Godbole, Wavelet Thresholding Approach For Image Denoising, International Journal of Network Security & Its Applications (IJNSA), Vol.3, No.4, pp. 16-21, 2011. [12] Rong Bai, Wavelet Shrinkage Based Image Denoising Using Soft Computing, Thesis for Master of Applied Science in University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.2008. [13] Rudra Pratap Singh Chauhan, A Novel Approach To Overcome The Intertwined Shortcomings Of DWT for Image Processing and De-Noising International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 2012. [14] S.G. Chang, Y. Bin, and M. Vetterli, Spatially adaptive wavelet thresholding with context modeling for image denoising," IEEE Trans. on Image Proc., vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 1532 - 1546, 2000. [15] S.G. Chang, Y. Bin, and M. Vetterli, Adaptive wavelet thresholding for image denoising and compression," IEEE Trans. on Image Proc., vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 1522 {1531, 2000. Tajinder Singh received his bachelors Degree in Information Technology (IT) from PTU, Jalandhar, Punjab (India) in 2009, and pursuing master degree in CSE from Punjab Technical University Jalandhar, Punjab, India. His research interest includes Software Engineering, Digital Image processing especially in Image De-noising, Image segmentation & Enhancement. Rajeev Bedi received his bachelors Degree in Computer Science & Engineering (CSE) from Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar, Punjab (India) in 2000, and his master degree in Computer Science & Engineering (CSE) from Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar, Punjab (India) in 2000, and his master degree in Computer Science & Engineering (CSE) from Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar, Punjab (India) in 2008. He is currently working as Assistant Professor in Computer Science and Engineering (CSE) department of Beant College of Engineering & Technology, Gurdaspur, Punjab, (India). His area of interest includes Programming Languages, .NET Technologies, Software Volume 2, Issue 2 March April 2013 Page 41 Engineering and currently one of the potential emerging areas Cloud Computing.

A Novel Approach For Image De-Noising Using Wavelets

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

A Novel Approach For Image De-Noising Using Wavelets

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)