Skip to main content
Log in

Hardware Implementation of Enhancement Embedded Reduced Runtime Recovery Algorithm for Compressively Sensed Images

  • Published:
Wireless Personal Communications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Compressed sensing is based on the principle that, through optimization, the sparsity of a signal can be exploited to recover it from fewer samples than required by the criterion. In compressed sensing, data is compressed and converted into fewer measurements and transmitted through wireless channel which is reconstructed at the receiver. Since very few samples are used for reconstruction, there are possibilities of degradation in quality of reconstruction. Unlike traditional methods, enhancement can now be done using the recent technique of compressed sensing by embedding image enhancement techniques like edge detection, histogram, filtering and their combinations with CS recovery procedure. This work proposes such a method by binding the image enhancement techniques along with the compressed sensing process. Filter of Gaussian filter (FGF), a combinational filter proposed in this study enables an increase in PSNR of 1 dB when compared to other filtering techniques besides using least number of measurements and maintaining minimum time consumption. The runtime difference with and without the FGF is ~ 3 s, which is affordable even in hardware with minimum specifications. Real time experimentation of embedded enhancement CS was carried out in WINGZ board to prove the feasibility of enhanced recovery process with lower end hardware.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Candes, E., & Wakin, M. (2008). An introduction to compressive sampling. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 25(2), 21–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Candes, Emmanual, Romberg, Justin, & Tao, Terence. (2006). Robust uncertainty principles: Exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information. EEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52(2), 489–509.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Cai, T. T., & Wang, L. (2011). Orthogonal matching pursuit for sparse signal recovery with noise. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 57(7), 4680–4688.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Donoho, D. L., Tsaig, Y., Drori, I., & Starck, J. L. (2012). Sparse solution of underdetermined systems of linear equations by stagewise orthogonal matching pursuit. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 58(2), 1094–1121.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Needell, Deanna, & Tropp, J. A. (2010). Cosamp: Iterative signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate samples. Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis, 53(12), 93–100.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Poovathy, J., & Radha, S. (2015). Non-iterative threshold based recovery algorithm (NITRA) for compressively sensed images and videos. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 9(10), 4160–4176.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Florence, J., Poovathy, G., Deepika, B., & Radha, S. (2015). Reduced runtime recovery algorithm for compressively sensed images. In 2nd international conference on next generation computing and communication technologies (ICNGCCT 2015).

  8. Lee, J. S. (1980). Digital image enhancement and noise filtering by use of local statistics. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2(2), 165–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jinshan, T., Peli, E., & Acton, S. (2003). Image enhancement using a contrast measure in the compressed domain. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 10(10), 289–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wang, Yu., Chen, Qian, & Zhang, Baeomin. (1999). Image enhancement based on equal area dualistic sub-image histogram equalization method. IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 45(1), 68–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sun, C. C., Ruan, S. J., Shie, M. C., & Pai, T. W. (2005). Dnamic contrast enhancement based on histogram specification. IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 51(4), 1300–1305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gonzalez, R. C., & Woods, R. E. (2012). Digital image processing. 3rd Ed, Pearson Publications.

  13. Nanda, K., Nayak, K., Chippalkatti, S., Rao, R., Selvakumar, D., & Pasupuleti, H. (2012, December). Web based monitoring and control of WSN using WINGZ (Wireless IP network gateway for Zigbee). In Sensing Technology (ICST), 2012 Sixth International Conference on, (pp. 666–671).

  14. Onishi, N., et al. (2018). Ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced mri of the breast using compressed sensing: breast cancer diagnosis based on separate visualization of breast arteries and veins. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 47(1), 97–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Basha, T. A., et al. (2017). Clinical performance of high-resolution late gadolinium enhancement imaging with compressed sensing. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 46(6), 1829–1838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Rosenkrantz, A. B., et al. (2015). Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the prostate with high spatiotemporal resolution using compressed sensing, parallel imaging, and continuous golden-angle radial sampling: Preliminary experience. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 41(5), 1365–1373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Adcock, B., et al. (2017). Breaking the coherence barrier: A new theory for compressed sensing. In Forum of Mathematics, Sigma (Vol. 5). Cambridge University Press.

  18. Donoho, D. L. (2017). Method and apparatus for compressed sensing. U.S. Patent No. 9,626,560.

  19. Mrak, M., Grgic, S., & Grgic, M. (2003). Picture quality measures in image compression systems, EUROCON 2003. Computer as a Tool, The IEEE, 1, 233–236.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Suganesh, V., Gnana Poovathy, J. F., & Radha, S. (2016). Filtering of Gaussian filter based embedded enhancement technique for compressively sensed images. In Wireless communications, signal processing and networking (WiSPNET), International conference on, (pp. 2177–2181).

  21. http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/HIPR2/gsmooth.html. Accessed on 01 July 2016.

  22. E. Croot, et.al. (2008) Running time predictions for factoring algorithms. In International algorithmic number theory symposium, (pp. 1–36). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Florence Gnana Poovathy John.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 Mathematical Model of Error Bound

The error bound is the limit up to which the error is tolerable in a process. This section gives an idea about the error bound posed by FGF-R3A with the help of the following theorem.

Theorem

Consider a noisy observation \(y = \phi x + e\), where \(x\) is the input sparse vector with \(k\) non-zero elements and \(e\) the common error. Then, FGF-R3A would recover the enhanced estimation such that

$$\left\| {x - x_{e}} \right\|_{2} \le \left\| {x - x_{r}} \right\|_{2}$$
(5)

where \(\left\| {x - x_{e}} \right\|_{2}\) is the error between input and FGF-R3A recovery and \(\left\| {x - x_{r}} \right\|_{2}\) is the error between input and R3A recovery.

Proof

In order to prove Eq. (5), the concept of triangular inequality is considered with \(x_{r}\) as the third vertex of a triangle. \(x\) and \(x_{r}\) form the other two vertices of the triangle. Then, the left hand side of Eq. (5) can be represented as

$$\left\| {x - x_{e}} \right\|_{2} \le \left\| {x_{r} - x_{e}} \right\|_{2} + \left\| {x - x_{r}} \right\|_{2}$$
(6)

where, \(x_{r}\) is algorithmically the recovered signal without enhancement. From Theorem 1 in [6], it is clear that

$$\left\| {x - x_{r}} \right\|_{2} \le \left\| {x_{k}} \right\|_{2} + \tilde{\varepsilon}$$
(7)

where, \(\tilde{\varepsilon}\) is the error that is dependent upon \(x_{k}\). In [5] Needel and Tropp express this error as in Eq. (8).

$$\tilde{\varepsilon} = \left\| {x - x_{k}} \right\|_{2} + \frac{1}{\sqrt k}\left\| {x - x_{k}} \right\|_{1} + \left\| {\tilde{e}} \right\|_{2}$$
(8)

Substituting (8) in (7), (9) is obtained.

$$\left\| {x - x_{r}} \right\|_{2} \le \left\| {x_{k}} \right\|_{2} + \left\| {x - x_{k}} \right\|_{2} + \frac{1}{\sqrt k}\left\| {x - x_{k}} \right\|_{1} + \left\| {\tilde{e}} \right\|_{2}$$
(9)

Substituting (9) in the inequality expression (6),

$$\left\| {x - x_{e}} \right\|_{2} \le \left\| {x_{r} - x_{e}} \right\|_{2} + \left\| {x_{k}} \right\|_{2} + \left\| {x - x_{k}} \right\|_{2} + \frac{1}{\sqrt k}\left\| {x - x_{k}} \right\|_{1} + \left\| {\tilde{e}} \right\|_{2}$$
(10)

In the above equation, \(\left\| {\tilde{e}} \right\|_{2}\) is the observation error which is almost zero \(\left({\left\| {\tilde{e}} \right\|_{2} \cong 0} \right)\) and hence can be neglected. Also, \(x_{r}\) is the recovered signal and \(x_{e}\) is the enhanced signal and hence the difference between these two quantities will be close to zero compared to the other terms in the equation. Thus \(\left\| {x_{r} - x_{e}} \right\|_{2} \cong 0\). After the elimination of these two elements, Eq. (10) can be written as

$$\left\| {x - x_{e}} \right\|_{2} \le \left\| {x_{k}} \right\|_{2} + \left\| {x - x_{k}} \right\|_{2} + \frac{1}{\sqrt k}\left\| {x - x_{k}} \right\|_{1}$$
(11)

Using Eq. (9), the left hand terms of (11) can be replaced as

$$\left\| {x - x_{e}} \right\|_{2} \le \left\| {x - x_{r}} \right\|_{2}$$
(12)

Thus the error between the input signal \(x\) and the enhanced signal \(x_{e}\) is less than the error between \(x\) and the recovered signal \(x_{r}\). Hence the error bound of FGF-R3A is limited to \(\left\| {x - x_{r}} \right\|_{2}\).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

John, F., Sankararajan, R. Hardware Implementation of Enhancement Embedded Reduced Runtime Recovery Algorithm for Compressively Sensed Images. Wireless Pers Commun 102, 229–246 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-018-5836-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-018-5836-9

Keywords

Navigation