OSA's Digital Library

Applied Optics

Applied Optics


  • Editor: Joseph N. Mait
  • Vol. 51, Iss. 8 — Mar. 10, 2012
  • pp: 1178–1187

On the influence of noise statistics on polarimetric contrast optimization

Guillaume Anna, François Goudail, Pierre Chavel, and Daniel Dolfi  »View Author Affiliations

Applied Optics, Vol. 51, Issue 8, pp. 1178-1187 (2012)

View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (815 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



In active scalar polarimetric imaging systems, the illumination and analysis polarization states are degrees of freedom that can be used to maximize the performance. These optimal states depend on the statistics of the noise that perturbs image acquisition. We investigate the problem of optimization of discrimination ability (contrast) of such imagers in the presence of three different types of noise statistics frequently encountered in optical images (Gaussian, Poisson, and Gamma). To compare these different situations within a common theoretical framework, we use the Bhattacharyya distance and the Fisher ratio as measures of contrast. We show that the optimal states depend on a trade-off between the target/background intensity difference and the average intensity in the acquired image, and that this trade-off depends on the noise statistics. On a few examples, we show that the gain in contrast obtained by implementing the states adapted to the noise statistics actually present in the image can be significant.

© 2012 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(030.4280) Coherence and statistical optics : Noise in imaging systems
(260.5430) Physical optics : Polarization

ToC Category:
Physical Optics

Original Manuscript: September 9, 2011
Manuscript Accepted: January 12, 2012
Published: March 9, 2012

Guillaume Anna, François Goudail, Pierre Chavel, and Daniel Dolfi, "On the influence of noise statistics on polarimetric contrast optimization," Appl. Opt. 51, 1178-1187 (2012)

Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  


  1. J. S. Tyo, M. P Rowe, E. N. Pugh, and N. Engheta, “Target detection in optical scattering media by polarization-difference imaging,” Appl. Opt. 35, 1855–1870 (1996). [CrossRef]
  2. J. E. Solomon, “Polarization imaging,” Appl. Opt. 20, 1537–1544 (1981). [CrossRef]
  3. R. Walraven, “Polarization imagery,” Opt. Eng. 20, 14–18 (1981).
  4. A. B. Kostinski and W. M. Boerner, “On the polarimetric contrast optimization,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 35, 988–991 (1987). [CrossRef]
  5. A. A. Swartz, H. A. Yueh, J. A. Kong, L. M. Novak, and R. T. Shin, “Optimal polarizations for achieving maximal contrast in radar images,” J. Geophys. Res. 93, 15252–15260 (1988). [CrossRef]
  6. J. Yang, Y. Yamaguchi, W.-M. Boerner, and S. Lin, “Numerical methods for solving the optimal problem of contrast enhancement,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 38, 965–971 (2000). [CrossRef]
  7. M. Floc’h, G. Le Brun, C. Kieleck, J. Cariou, and J. Lotrian, “Polarimetric considerations to optimize lidar detection of immersed targets,” Pure Appl. Opt. 7, 1327–1340 (1998). [CrossRef]
  8. F. Goudail, “Optimization of the contrast in active Stokes images,” Opt. Lett. 34, 121–123 (2009). [CrossRef]
  9. M. Richert, X. Orlik, and A. De Martino, “Adapted polarization state contrast image,” Opt. Express 17, 14199–14210 (2009). [CrossRef]
  10. F. Goudail, “Comparison of the maximal achievable contrast in scalar, Stokes, and Mueller images,” Opt. Lett. 35, 2600–2602 (2010). [CrossRef]
  11. G. Anna, F. Goudail, and D. Dolfi, “Polarimetric target detection in the presence of spatially fluctuating Mueller matrices,” Opt. Lett. 36, 4590–4592 (2011). [CrossRef]
  12. F. Goudail, P. Réfrégier, and G. Delyon, “Bhattacharyya distance as a contrast parameter for statistical processing of noisy optical images,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 21, 1231–1240 (2004). [CrossRef]
  13. T. M. Cover and A. Thomas, Elements of Information Theory (Wiley, 1991).
  14. A. Jain, P. Moulin, M. I. Miller, and K. Ramchandran, “Information-theoretic bounds on target recognition performance based on degraded image data,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell. 24, 1153–1166 (2002). [CrossRef]
  15. P. Réfrégier and F. Goudail, “Invariant polarimetric contrast parameters for coherent light,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19, 1223–1233 (2002). [CrossRef]
  16. J. W. Goodman, Statistical Optics (Wiley, 1985).
  17. K. Kim, L. Mandel, and E. Wolf, “Relationship between Jones and Mueller matrices for random media,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 433–437 (1987). [CrossRef]
  18. M. Shribak, “Complete polarization state generator with one variable retarder and its application for fast and sensitive measuring of two-dimensional birefringence distribution,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 28, 410–419 (2011). [CrossRef]
  19. S. Y. Lu and R. A. Chipman, “Interpretation of Mueller matrices based on polar decomposition,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 13, 1106–1113 (1996). [CrossRef]
  20. S. Breugnot and P. Clémenceau, “Modeling and performances of a polarization active imager at λ=806  nm,” Proc. SPIE 3707, 449–460 (1999). [CrossRef]
  21. M. Antonelli, A. Pierangelo, T. Novikova, P. Validire, A. Benali, B. Gayet, and A. DeMartino, “Mueller matrix imaging of human colon tissue for cancer diagnostics: how Monte Carlo modeling can help in the interpretation of experimental data,” Opt. Express 18, 10200–10208 (2010). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

« Previous Article

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited