OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: C. Martijn de Sterke
  • Vol. 19, Iss. 14 — Jul. 4, 2011
  • pp: 13509–13524

Deconvolution of astronomical images using SOR with adaptive relaxation

S. V. Vorontsov, V. N. Strakhov, S. M. Jefferies, and K. J. Borelli  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 19, Issue 14, pp. 13509-13524 (2011)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.19.013509


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (1867 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We address the potential performance of the successive overrelaxation technique (SOR) in image deconvolution, focusing our attention on the restoration of astronomical images distorted by atmospheric turbulence. SOR is the classical Gauss-Seidel iteration, supplemented with relaxation. As indicated by earlier work, the convergence properties of SOR, and its ultimate performance in the deconvolution of blurred and noisy images, can be made competitive to other iterative techniques, including conjugate gradients, by a proper choice of the relaxation parameter. The question of how to choose the relaxation parameter, however, remained open, and in the practical work one had to rely on experimentation. In this paper, using constructive (rather than exact) arguments, we suggest a simple strategy for choosing the relaxation parameter and for updating its value in consecutive iterations to optimize the performance of the SOR algorithm (and its positivity-constrained version, +SOR) at finite iteration counts. We suggest an extension of the algorithm to the notoriously difficult problem of “blind” deconvolution, where both the true object and the point-spread function have to be recovered from the blurred image. We report the results of numerical inversions with artificial and real data, where the algorithm is compared with techniques based on conjugate gradients. In all of our experiments +SOR provides the highest quality results. In addition +SOR is found to be able to detect moderately small changes in the true object between separate data frames: an important quality for multi-frame blind deconvolution where stationarity of the object is a necesessity.

© 2011 OSA

OCIS Codes
(100.0100) Image processing : Image processing
(100.3020) Image processing : Image reconstruction-restoration
(100.3190) Image processing : Inverse problems
(100.1455) Image processing : Blind deconvolution

ToC Category:
Image Processing

History
Original Manuscript: April 22, 2011
Revised Manuscript: May 31, 2011
Manuscript Accepted: June 8, 2011
Published: June 28, 2011

Citation
S. V. Vorontsov, V. N. Strakhov, S. M. Jefferies, and K. J. Borelli, "Deconvolution of astronomical images using SOR with adaptive relaxation," Opt. Express 19, 13509-13524 (2011)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-19-14-13509


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. V. N. Strakhov and S. V. Vorontsov, “Digital image deblurring with SOR,” Inverse Probl. 24, 025024 (2008) (Paper I). [CrossRef]
  2. K. Sauer and C. Bouman, “A local update strategy for iterative reconstruction from projections,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 41, 534–548 (1993). [CrossRef]
  3. J. A. Fessler, “Penalized weighted least-squares image reconstruction for positron emission tomography,” IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 13, 290–300 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. A. Björck, Numerical Methods for Least Squares Problems (SIAM, 1996). [CrossRef]
  5. C. W. Cryer, “The solution of a quadratic programming problem using systematic overrelaxation,” SIAM J. Control 9, 385–392 (1971). [CrossRef]
  6. R. G. Lane and R. H. T. Bates, “Automatic multidimensional deconvolution,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 4, 180–188 (1987). [CrossRef]
  7. R. T. H. Bates, B. K. Quek, and C. R. Parker, “Some implications of zero sheets for blind deconvolution and phase retrieval,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 7, 468–479 (1990). [CrossRef]
  8. R. C. Puetter, T. R. Gosnell, and A. Yahil, “Digital image reconstruction: deblurring and denoising,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 43, 139–194 (2005). [CrossRef]
  9. D. Calvetti, G. Landi, L. Reichel, and F. Sgallari, “Non-negativity and iterative methods for ill-posed problems,” Inverse Probl. 20, 1747–1758 (2004). [CrossRef]
  10. P. C. Hansen, “Analysis of discrete ill-posed problems by means of the L-curve,” SIAM Rev. 34, 561–580 (1992). [CrossRef]
  11. C. R. Vogel, Computational Methods for Inverse Problems (SIAM, 2002). [CrossRef]
  12. C. L. Matson, K. Borelli, S. M. Jefferies, E. K. Hege, C. C. Beckner, and M. Lloyd-Hart, “A fast and optimal multiframe blind deconvolution algorithm for high-resolution, ground-based imaging of space objects,” Appl. Opt. 48, A75–A92 (2009). [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