Image analysis – Image enhancement or restoration – Image filter
Reexamination Certificate
2001-08-22
2002-12-03
Mancuso, Joseph (Department: 2623)
Image analysis
Image enhancement or restoration
Image filter
C382S205000, C382S275000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06490374
ABSTRACT:
COMPUTER APPENDIX
A “computer program listing appendix” containing computer program source code for programs described herein is submitted on a compact disc pursuant to 37 C.F.R. 1.96(c). The computer program listing appendix is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. The Computer Appendix contains material that is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates generally to signal encoding and reconstruction. More particularly, the present invention relates to devices and methods for reconstructing a signal from measurement data from a detector.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Exact measurement of the properties of nature is a common goal within the experimental sciences. Similarly, medical diagnostics and communications technology, among other scientific endeavors, seek the ability to obtain exact measurement of properties within their respective fields, e.g., MRI or free space optical or other electromagnetic transmission. Optimal extraction of the underlying measurement data requires the removal of measurement defects such as noise and limited instrumental resolution. However, in spite of the availability of highly sophisticated instruments, noise and instrumental signatures are still present in the data, making the measurement only approximate.
An area of experimental science in which instrumental signatures are particularly a problem is astronomy, where the signal sources to be measured are very faint. Even when the instruments are made essentially noise-free, instrumental signatures related to finite spatial, spectral, or temporal resolution remain. At this point, image reconstruction is required to remove the instrumental signatures.
One of the most powerful approaches to image restoration, e.g., removal of point-spread-function blurring, is Bayesian image reconstruction, which includes Goodness-of-Fit (Maximum Likelihood) and Maximum Entropy data fitting. This family of techniques employs a statistical relationship between various quantities involved in the imaging process. Specifically, the data, D, consisting of the original noisy, blurred image model is linked to the desired noise-free, unblurred image model, I, through a model, M. The model M includes all aspects of the relationship between the data and the image, e.g., that the data is normally collected on a rectangular grid and that the data is related to the image model through the relationship
D
(
i
)=(
I*H
)(
i
)+
N
(
i
), (1)
where D(i) is the data in cell i (typically a pixel), I is the image model, H is the point-spread-function (PSF) due to instrumental and possible atmospheric blurring, * is the spatial convolution operator, i.e.,
(
f
*
g
)
⁢
(
x
)
=
∫
-
∞
∞
⁢
⁢
ⅆ
x
′
⁢
f
⁡
(
x
′
)
⁢
g
⁡
(
x
-
x
′
)
(
2
)
and N represents the noise in the data, assuming the PSF is a function only of displacement between pixels. In general, the PSF can vary across the field.
Image reconstruction differs from standard solutions of integral equations due to the noise term, N, that nature of which is only known statistically. Methods for solving such an equation fall under the categories of (1) direct methods, which apply explicit operators to data to provide estimates of the image, and (2) indirect methods, which model the noiseless image, transform it only forward to provide a noise-free data model, then fit the parameters of the image to minimize the residuals between the real data and the noise-free data model. The direct methods have the advantage of speed, but they tend to amplify noise, particularly at high frequencies. The indirect methods supposedly exclude the noise, however, the required modeling is a disadvantage. If a good parametric form for the image is known a priori, the result can be very good.
To statistically model the imaging process, Bayesian image reconstruction methods analyze the properties of the joint probability distribution of the triplet, D, I and M, i.e., p(D,I,M). Applying Bayes' Theorem [p(A,B)=p(A B)p(B)=p(B A)p(A), where p(X Y) is the probability of X given that Y is known] provides:
p
(
D,I,M
)=
p
(
D I,M
)
p
(
I M
)
p
(
M
)=
p
(
I D,M
)
p
(
D M
)
p
(
M
) (3)
By setting the first factorization of p(D,I,M) in Equation 3 equal to the second factorization provides the usual starting point for Bayesian reconstruction:
p
⁡
(
I
⁢
⁢
D
,
M
)
=
p
⁡
(
D
⁢
⁢
I
,
M
)
⁢
p
⁡
(
I
⁢
⁢
M
)
p
⁡
(
D
⁢
⁢
M
)
(
4
)
A common goal of Bayesian image reconstruction is to find the M.A.P. (Maximum A Posteriori) image, I, which maximizes p(I D,M), i.e., the most probable image given the data and model. (Note that other image estimates, e.g., the average image, <I>=∫
D,M
dMdD I p(I D,M), may be used here and in the methods described in the detailed description.) (MAP image reconstruction is also sometimes known as parametric least-squares fitting.)
It is common in Bayesian image reconstruction-to assume that the model is fixed. In this case, p(D M) is constant, so that
p
(
I D,M
)∝
p
(
D I,M
)
p
(
I M
). (5)
The first term, p(D I,M), is a goodness-of-fit quantity, measuring the likelihood of the data given a particular image and model. The second term, p(I M), is normally referred to as the “image prior”, and expresses the a priori probability of a particular realization of the image given the model. In Goodness-of-Fit (GOF) image reconstruction, p(I M) is effectively set to unity, i.e., there is no prior bias concerning the image. Only the Goodness-of-Fit (p(D I,M)) is maximized during image reconstruction. Typically,
p
(
I|D,M
)=exp(−&khgr;
2
R
/2), (6)
where &khgr;
2
R
is the chi-square of the residuals, R (≡D−I*H). While this approach ensures that the frequency distribution of the residuals has a width which is characteristic of the noise distribution, it normally results in images with spurious spatial features where the data has a low signal to noise ratio (SNR). Also, the large amplitude residuals often show a strong spatial correlation with bright features in the data.
When no parametric model of the image is known, the number of image model parameters can quickly become comparable to, or exceed, the number of data points. In this case, a MAP solution becomes inappropriate. For example, if the number of points in the image model equals the number of data points, the nonsingular nature of the transform in Equation 1 assures that there is a solution for which the data, including the noise, are exactly modeled with zero residuals. This is the same poor solution, with all its noise amplification, obtained by the naive Fourier deconvolution. Thus, an unrestricted indirect method is no better at controlling noise than a direct method, and therefore, the image model must. be restricted in some way. The indirect methods restrict the image model and differ only in the specifics of image restriction.
A simple restriction is to constrain the model image to be positive. Since even a delta-function image is broadened by the PSF, it follows that the exact inverse of any noisy data with fluctuations on scales smaller than the PSF must be both positive and negative. By preventing the image from becoming negative, the noise-free data model cannot fluctuate on scales smaller than the PSF, which is equivalent to smoothing the data on the scale of the PSF. However, this Non-Negative Least-Squares (NNLS) fit method is not able to eliminate noise fitting on larger scales.
Maximum entropy (ME) image reconstruction solves many of the problems of the simpler GOF methods (e.g., NNLS). In ME imaging, one calculates a value for the image prior based upon “phase space vo
Puetter Richard
Yahil Amos
Brown Martin Haller & McClain LLP
Dastouri Mehrdad
The Regents of the University of California
LandOfFree
Accelerated signal encoding and reconstruction using pixon... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Accelerated signal encoding and reconstruction using pixon..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Accelerated signal encoding and reconstruction using pixon... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2997731