By Topic

Majorization–Minimization Algorithms for Wavelet-Based Image Restoration

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

3 Author(s)
Figueiredo, M.A.T. ; Inst. de Telecomunicacoes, Tech. Univ. of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal ; Bioucas-Dias, J.M. ; Nowak, R.D.

Standard formulations of image/signal deconvolution under wavelet-based priors/regularizers lead to very high-dimensional optimization problems involving the following difficulties: the non-Gaussian (heavy-tailed) wavelet priors lead to objective functions which are nonquadratic, usually nondifferentiable, and sometimes even nonconvex; the presence of the convolution operator destroys the separability which underlies the simplicity of wavelet-based denoising. This paper presents a unified view of several recently proposed algorithms for handling this class of optimization problems, placing them in a common majorization-minimization (MM) framework. One of the classes of algorithms considered (when using quadratic bounds on nondifferentiable log-priors) shares the infamous ??singularity issue?? (SI) of ??iteratively re weighted least squares?? (IRLS) algorithms: the possibility of having to handle infinite weights, which may cause both numerical and convergence issues. In this paper, we prove several new results which strongly support the claim that the SI does not compromise the usefulness of this class of algorithms. Exploiting the unified MM perspective, we introduce a new algorithm, resulting from using bounds for nonconvex regularizers; the experiments confirm the superior performance of this method, when compared to the one based on quadratic majorization. Finally, an experimental comparison of the several algorithms, reveals their relative merits for different standard types of scenarios.

Published in:

Image Processing, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:16 ,  Issue: 12 )