Cargando…

Parameter Estimation of Poisson–Gaussian Signal-Dependent Noise from Single Image of CMOS/CCD Image Sensor Using Local Binary Cyclic Jumping

Since signal-dependent noise in a local weak texture region of a noisy image is approximated as additive noise, the corresponding noise parameters can be estimated from a given set of weakly textured image blocks. As a result, the meticulous selection of weakly textured image blocks plays a decisive...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Jinyu, Wu, Yuqian, Zhang, Yu, Zhao, Jufeng, Si, Yingsong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8705815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34960423
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21248330
Descripción
Sumario:Since signal-dependent noise in a local weak texture region of a noisy image is approximated as additive noise, the corresponding noise parameters can be estimated from a given set of weakly textured image blocks. As a result, the meticulous selection of weakly textured image blocks plays a decisive role to estimate the noise parameters accurately. The existing methods consider the finite directions of the texture of image blocks or directly use the average value of an image block to select the weakly textured image block, which can result in errors. To overcome the drawbacks of the existing methods, this paper proposes a novel noise parameter estimation method using local binary cyclic jumping to aid in the selection of these weakly textured image blocks. The texture intensity of the image block is first defined by the cumulative average of the LBCJ information in the eight neighborhoods around the pixel, and, subsequently, the threshold is set for selecting weakly textured image blocks through texture intensity distribution of the image blocks and inverse binomial cumulative function. The experimental results reveal that the proposed method outperforms the existing alternative algorithms by 23% and 22% for the evaluative measures of MSE (a) and MSE (b), respectively.