Multiscale Transform and Shrinkage Thresholding Techniques for Medical Image Denoising – Performance Evaluation

Nisha, S. Shajun; Raja, S. P.

doi:10.2478/cait-2020-0033

Abstract

Due to sparsity and multiresolution properties, Mutiscale transforms are gaining popularity in the field of medical image denoising. This paper empirically evaluates different Mutiscale transform approaches such as Wavelet, Bandelet, Ridgelet, Contourlet, and Curvelet for image denoising. The image to be denoised first undergoes decomposition and then the thresholding is applied to its coefficients. This paper also deals with basic shrinkage thresholding techniques such Visushrink, Sureshrink, Neighshrink, Bayeshrink, Normalshrink and Neighsureshrink to determine the best one for image denoising. Experimental results on several test images were taken on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), X-RAY and Computed Tomography (CT). Qualitative performance metrics like Peak Signal to Noise Ratio (PSNR), Weighted Signal to Noise Ratio (WSNR), Structural Similarity Index (SSIM), and Correlation Coefficient (CC) were computed. The results shows that Contourlet based Medical image denoising methods are achieving significant improvement in association with Neighsureshrink thresholding technique.

References

1. Bhonsle, D., V. Chandra, G. R. Sinha. Medical Image Denoising Using Bilateral Filter. I. J. Image. – Graphics and Signal Processing, Vol. 4, 2012, No 6. pp. 36-43. DOI:10.5815/ijigsp.2012.06.06.10.5815/ijigsp.2012.06.06
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
2. Gonzalez, R. C., R. E. Woods. Digital Image Processing. Second Ed. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 2002.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
3. Mallat, S. G. A Theory for Multiresolution Signal Decomposition: The Wavelet Representation. – IEEE Transaction on Pattern Recognition and Machine Intelligence, Vol. 11, 1987, No 7. pp. 674-695. DOI:10.1109/34.192463.10.1109/34.192463
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
4. Donoho, D. L., I. M. Johnstone. Adatpting Tounknow Smoothness via Wavelet Shrinkage. – Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 90, 1995, No 432. pp. 1200-1224. DOI:10.1.1.161.8697.10.1080/01621459.1995.10476626
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
5. Zhang, M., B. K. Guntuk. Multiresolution Bilateral Filtering for Image Denoising. – IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Vol. 17, 2008, No 12, pp. 2324-2333.10.1109/TIP.2008.2006658261456019004705
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
6. Coifman, R., D. Donoho. Translation Invariant Denoising. – In: Lecture Notes in Statistics: Wavelets and Statistics. Vol. 1995. New York, Springer-Verlag. 1995, pp. 125-150.10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_9
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
7. Selesnick, I. W. The Double Density Dual Tree DWT. – IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, Vol. 52, 2004, No 5, pp. 1304-1314.10.1109/TSP.2004.826174
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
8. Candès, E. J., D. L. Donoho. Curvelets: A Surprisingly Effective Nonadaptive Representation for Objects with Edges in Curve and Surface Fitting. Nashville, TN: Vanderbuilt Univ. Press, 2000.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
9. Chen, G. Y., B. Kégl. Image Denoising with Complex Ridgelets. – Elsevier, Pattern Recognition, Vol. 40, 2007, No 2, pp. 578-585.10.1016/j.patcog.2006.04.039
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
10. Nezamoddini-Kachouie, N., P. Fieguth, E. Jernigan. Bayes Shrink Ridgelets for Image Denoising. – Springer, ICIAR, LNCS 3211, 2004, pp.163-170.10.1007/978-3-540-30125-7_21
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
11. Patil, A. A., J. Singhai. Image Denoising Using Curvelettransform: An Approach for Edge Preservation. – Journal of Scientific & Industrial Research, Vol. 69, 2010, No 1, pp. 34-38.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
12. Bala, A. A., C. Hati, C. H. Punith. Image Denoising Method Using Curvelet Transform and Wiener Filter. – International Journal of Advanced Research in Electrical, Electronics and Instrumentation Engineering. Vol. 3, 2014, No 1.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
13. Starck, J.-L., E. J. Candès, D. L. Donoho. The Curvelet Transform for Image Denoising. – IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Vol. 11, 2002, No 6, pp. 670-684.10.1109/TIP.2002.101499818244665
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
14. Starck, J.-L., E. J. Candes, D. L. Donoho. The Curvelet Transform for Image Denoising. – IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Vol. 11, 2002, No 6, pp. 670-684.10.1109/TIP.2002.1014998
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
15. Mallat, S., G. Peyré. A Review of Bandlet Methods for Geometrical Image Representation. – Numerical Algorithms, Vol. 44, 2007, No 3, pp. 205-234.10.1007/s11075-007-9092-4
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
16. Villegas, O. O. V., H. J. O. Domínguez, V. G. C. Sánchez. A Comparison of the Bandelet, Wavelet and Contourlet Transforms for Image Denoising. – In: Proc. of 7th Mexican International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2008, pp 207-212.10.1109/MICAI.2008.63
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
17. Zhou, Y., J. Wang. Image Denoising Based on the Symmetric Normal Inverse Gaussian Model and Non-Subsampled Contourlet Transform. – IET Image Processing, Vol. 6, 2013, No 8, pp. 1136-1147.10.1049/iet-ipr.2012.0148
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
18. Eslami, R., H. Radha. Translation Invariant Contourlet Transform and Its Application to Image Denoising. – IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Vol. 15, 2006, No 11, pp. 3362-3374.10.1109/TIP.2006.88199217076396
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
19. Babu, J. J. J., G. F. Sudha. Non-Subsampled Contourlet Transform Based Image Denoising in Ultrasound Thyroid Images Using Adaptive Binary Morphological Operations. – IET Computer Vision, Vol. 8, 2014, No 6, pp. 718-728.10.1049/iet-cvi.2014.0008
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
20. Hao, W., J. Li, X. Qu, Z. Dong. Fast Iterative Contourlet Thresholding for Compressed Sensing MR. – Electronic Letters, Vol. 49, 2013, No 19, pp. 1206-1208.10.1049/el.2013.1483
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
21. Bhateja, V., H. Patel, A. Krishn, A. Sahu. Multimodal Medical Image Sensor Fusion Framework Using Cascade of Wavelet and Contourlet Transform Domains. – IEEE Sensors Journal, Vol. 15, 2015, No 12, pp. 6783-6790.10.1109/JSEN.2015.2465935
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
22. Mansour, M., H. Mouhadjer, A. Alipacha, K. Draoui. Comparative Analysis on Image Compression Techniques for Chromosome Images. – International Conference on Advances in Biomedical Engineering, 2013, pp. 34-37.10.1109/ICABME.2013.6648840
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
23. Jeena, J., P. Salice, J. Neetha. Denoising Using Soft Thresholding. – International Journal of Advanced Reseach in Electrical, Electronic and Instrumentation Engineering, Vol. 2, 2013, No 3, pp. 1027-1032.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
24. Chang, S. G., B. Yu, M. Vattereli. Adaptive Wavelet Thresholding for Image Denoising and Compression. – IEEE Transactions of Image Processing, Vol. 9, 2000, No 9, pp. 1532-1546.10.1109/83.86263318262991
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
25. Jansen, M. Noise Reduction by Wavelet Thresholding. New York, Springer Verlag, Inc., 2001.10.1007/978-1-4613-0145-5
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
26. Fodor, I. K., C. Kamath. Denoising through Wavlet Shrinkage: An Empirical Study. Center for Applied Science Computing Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 2001.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
27. Donoho, D. L., J. M. Johnstone. Ideal Spatial Adaptation by Wavelet Shrinkage. – Biometrika, Vol. 81, 1994, No 30, pp. 425-455.10.1093/biomet/81.3.425
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
28. Dengwen, Z., W. Cheng. Image Denoising with an Optimal Threshold and Neighbouring Window. – Journal Pattern Recognition Letters, Vol. 29, 2008, No 11, pp. 1603-1704.10.1016/j.patrec.2008.04.014
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
29. Dewangan, N., A. D. Goswami. Image Denoising Using Wavletthresholding Methods. – Int. J. of Engg. Sci. & Mgmt. (IJESM), Vol. 2, 2012, No 2, pp. 271-275.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
30. Kalra, G. S., S. Singh. Efficient Digital Image Denoising for Gray Scale Images. – Multimedia Tools and Applications, Vol. 75, 2016, No 8, pp. 4467-4484.10.1007/s11042-015-2484-x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
31. Hosotani, F., Y. Inuzuka, M. Hasegawa, S. Hirobayashi, T. Misawa. Image Denoising with Edge-Preserving and Segmentation Based on Mask NHA. – IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Vol. 24, 2015, No 12, pp. 6025-6033.10.1109/TIP.2015.249446126513792
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
32. Dhannawat, R., A. B. Patankar. Improvement to Blind Image Denoising by Using Local Pixel Grouping with SVD. – Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 79, 2016, pp. 314-320.10.1016/j.procs.2016.03.041
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
33. Guo, X., Y. Li, T. Suo, J. Liang. De-Noising of Digital Image Correlation Based on Stationary Wavelet Transform. – Optics and Lasers in Engineering, Vol. 90, 2017, pp. 161-172.10.1016/j.optlaseng.2016.10.015
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
34. Candes, E. J., D. L. Donoho. Ridgelets: A Key to Higher-Dimensional Intermittency?. – Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A., Vol. 357, 1999, No 1760, pp. 2495-2509.10.1098/rsta.1999.0444
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
35. Candès, E., D. Donoho. Curvelets: A Surprisingly Effective Nonadaptive Representation for Objects with Edge. – In: A. Cohen, C. Rabut, L. Schumaker, Eds. Curves and Surface Fitting: Saint-Malo. Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, 2000, pp. 105-120.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
36. Do, M. N., M. Vetterli. Thecontourlet Transform: An Efficient Directional Multiresolution Image Representation. – IEEE Trans. Image Process., Vol. 14, 2009, No 12, p. 2091.10.1109/TIP.2005.85937616370462
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
37. Le Pennec, E., S. Mallat. Sparse Geometric Image Representations With Bandelets. – IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Vol. 14, 2005, No 4, pp. 423-438.10.1109/TIP.2005.843753
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
38. Peyré, G., S. P. Mallat. Surface Compression with Geometric Bandelets. ACM Transactions on Graphics. – Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH, Vol. 24, 2005, No 3, pp. 601-608.10.1145/1073204.1073236
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
39. Chen, G. Y.. T. D. Bui, A. Krzyzak. Image Denoising with Neighbour Dependency and Customized Wavelet and Threshold. – Pattern Recognition, Vol. 38, 2005, No 1, pp. 115-124. DOI:10.1016/j.patcog.2004.05.009.10.1016/j.patcog.2004.05.009
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
40. Zhou, D., W. Cheng. Image Denoising with an Optimal Threshold and Neighbouring Window. – Elsevier Pattern Recognition, Vol. 29, 2008, No 11, pp. 1694-1697. DOI: 10.1016/j.patrec.2008.04.014.10.1016/j.patrec.2008.04.014
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
41. Xie, X. Research on the Image Denoising Method on Partial Differential Equations. – Cybernetics and Information Technologies, Vol. 16, 2016, No 5, pp. 109-118.10.1515/cait-2016-0057
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
42. Hashimoto, F., H. Ohba, K. Ote, A. Teramoto, H. Tsukada. Dynamic PET Image Denoising Using Deep Convolutional Neural Network without Prior Traning Datasets. – IEEE Access, Vol. 7, 2019, No 5, pp. 96594-96603.10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2929230
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
43. Chen, W., Y. Shao, L. Jia, Y. Wang, Q. Zhang, Y. Shang, Y. Liu, Y. Chen, Y. Liu, Z. Gui. Low-Dose CT Image Denoising Model Based on Sparse Representation by Stationarily Classified Sub-Dictionaries. – IEEE Access, Vol. 7, 2019, No 5, pp. 116859-116874.10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2932754
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Multiscale Transform and Shrinkage Thresholding Techniques for Medical Image Denoising – Performance Evaluation

Abstract

Paradigm

My account