OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

| OPTICS, IMAGE SCIENCE, AND VISION

  • Vol. 19, Iss. 1 — Jan. 1, 2002
  • pp: 64–70

Equivalence of cost generators for minimum cost flow phase unwrapping

Michael Hubig, Steffen Suchandt, and Nico Adam  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 19, Issue 1, pp. 64-70 (2002)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.19.000064


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (942 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

Phase unwrapping represents a crucial step in processing phase data obtained with techniques such as synthetic aperture radar interferometry, speckle interferometry, and magnetic resonance imaging. The so-called branch-cut approaches form an important class of phase unwrapping algorithms. In 1996, Costantini proposed to transform the problem of correctly placing branch cuts into a minimum cost flow problem [Proceedings of the Fringe ‘96 Workshop (European Space Agency, Munich, 1996), pp. 261–272]. The critical point of this new approach is to generate cost functions that have to represent all the a priori knowledge necessary for phase unwrapping. Any function transforming a priori knowledge into a cost function is called a cost generator. Several types of algorithms ranging from heuristic approaches to generators based on probability-theory interpretations were suggested. A problem arising from the growing diversity of algorithms is to find a criterion for the equivalence of different cost generators. Two cost generators are equivalent if they produce cost functions with the same minimal flow for every residue configuration on every image with all possible a priori knowledge. Comparing the results of different cost generators on test scenes can show only their nonequivalence. We solve this problem by proving the following mathematical classification theorem: Two cost generators are equivalent if and only if one can be transformed into the other by multiplication by a fixed constant.

© 2002 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(120.0280) Instrumentation, measurement, and metrology : Remote sensing and sensors
(120.3180) Instrumentation, measurement, and metrology : Interferometry
(280.6730) Remote sensing and sensors : Synthetic aperture radar

History
Original Manuscript: December 4, 2000
Revised Manuscript: May 3, 2001
Manuscript Accepted: May 3, 2001
Published: January 1, 2002

Citation
Michael Hubig, Steffen Suchandt, and Nico Adam, "Equivalence of cost generators for minimum cost flow phase unwrapping," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19, 64-70 (2002)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josaa/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-19-1-64


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. G. Fornaro, G. Franceschetti, R. Lanari, E. Sansosti, “Robust phase-unwrapping techniques: a comparison,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 13, 2355–2366 (1996). [CrossRef]
  2. H. A. Zebker, Y. Lu, “Phase unwrapping algorithms for radar interferometry: residue cut, least-squares, and synthesis algorithms,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 15, 586–598 (1998). [CrossRef]
  3. D. Ghilia, M. Pritt, Two-Dimensional Phase Unwrapping: Theory, Algorithms and Software (Wiley, New York, 1998).
  4. R. Ahuja, T. Magnanti, J. Orlin, Network Flows: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1993).
  5. M. Costantini, “A phase unwrapping method based on network programming,” Proceedings of the Fringe ’96 Workshop ERS SAR Interferometry, Zurich, Switzerland (European Space Agency, Munich, 1996), SP-406, pp. 261–272.
  6. M. Costantini, “A novel phase unwrapping method based on network programming,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 36, 813–821 (1998). [CrossRef]
  7. R. Bamler, P. Hartl, “Synthetic aperture radar interferometry,” Inverse Probl. 14, R1–R54 (1998). [CrossRef]
  8. R. Bamler, N. Adam, G. Davidson, D. Just, “Noise-induced slope distortion in 2-D phase unwrapping by linear estimators with application to SAR Interferometry,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 36, 913–921 (1998). [CrossRef]
  9. M. Eineder, M. Hubig, B. Milcke, “Unwrapping large interferograms using the minimum cost flow algorithm,” in Proceedings of the International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Society, T. Stein, ed. (IEEE Press, Piscataway, N.J., 1998), pp. 83–87.
  10. A. Refice, G. Satelino, S. Stramaglia, M. T. Chiaradia, N. Veneziani, “Weights determination for minimum cost flow InSAR phase unwrapping,” in Proceedings of the International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Society, T. Stein, ed. (IEEE Press, Piscataway, N.J., 1999), Vol. II, pp. 1342–1344.
  11. G. F. Carballo, P. W. Fieguth, “Probabilistic cost functions for network flow phase unwrapping,” in Proceedings of the International Science and Remote Sensing Society, T. Stein, ed. (IEEE Press, Piscataway, N.J., 1999), Vol. III, pp. 1531–1533.
  12. C. W. Chen, H. A. Zebker, “Network approaches to two-dimensional phase unwrapping: intractability and two new algorithms,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 17, 401–414 (2000). [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  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited