Jump to content

Talk:Richardson–Lucy deconvolution

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

The paragraph says "In the presence of noise, pixels in the observed image can be represented in terms of the point spread function and the latent image as..." but I can't see the noise in the equation. Does it lack an aditive term (+ epsilon) that takes into account Photon noise?

I think the equations here are correct: the noise is modelled by having as a random variable with a Poisson distribution. This becomes clear in the derivation of the iteration, something which I plan to add to the article. Chrisjohnson 00:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Original paper reference

[edit]

Should not the reference to the original paper in this article be to the "Astronomical Journal", not just to the "AJ"? (I've seen confusions of this sort before - example: "APJ" or "ApJ", when "Astrophysical Journal" - rather than "Applications Journal" - was meant.) Hair Commodore 21:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Googling reveals that the Astronomical Journal refers to itself as AJ or Astron. J. I've put the latter into the article. Chrisjohnson 00:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Layman description

[edit]

I study computer sciences, and was assigned a paper about this algorithm. I used MATLAB's implementation to demonstrate it in action, but my teachers are now requiring a layman's explanation of the algorithm. Does anybody know where I can find such a thing, or if it's even possible to explain it without advanced math? Mfuhlendorf 8 November 2007 Thanks.

I think you can get the article from Journal of the Optical Society of America (Vol. 62, No. 1, 1972) if your school has subscribed this journal. Besides I think only discussions on the topic itself should be put in this page. Zhuoxi huo (talk) 10:10, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

example/ explinations

[edit]

so I was thinking this could do with maybe a bit more explanation for folks that may have trouble grasping the index based description of this algorithm. If no one complains I might add the following to the main article in a few days time...

A more accessible description using element wise multiplication and division with the convolution operator is

Where is the th estimate of the latent image ; the observed blurred image and the blur kernel/PSF. This formulation, while still true for the 1D case, also illustrates how this algorithm works in 2D as well.

MatLab has a function that will perform devolution but for educational purposes this may be also handy

function latent_est = RL_deconvolution(observed, kernel, max_iterations)
    % to utilise the conv2 function we must make sure the inputs are double
    observed = double(observed);
    kernel = double(kernel);
    %start estimate uniform 50% grey - this can be picked as you like
    latent_est = 0.5*ones(size(observed));
    % iterate towards ML estimate for the latent image
    for i= 1:max_iterations
        est_convolved = conv2(latent_est,kernel,'same');
        relitive_blur = observed./est_convolved;
        errror_est = conv2(relitive_blur,kernel,'same'); 
        latent_est = latent_est.*errror_est;
        % draw output
        subplot(1,2,1)
        imagesc(observed); colormap('gray');
        title('blured original')
        subplot(1,2,2)
        imagesc(latent_est);colormap('gray');
        title(['iteration #' int2str(i)])
        drawnow;
    end
In the article page, the second point spread function is flipped. But here, it is not. Could you explain why ? RegardsAlexyangfox (talk) 03:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

tried to make it more intuitive, but failed.

[edit]

I am sort of a layman. I tried to make it more intuitive,but failed. It would be very nice if someone could point out where I am wrong.

here is my reasoning:

where

if the first equation above converges to ,I think all j elements in would approach one. It is very easy to check that all i elements in will approach 1. And this makes me so confused. The PSF will not be just a single point,this means it will make the j elements in other than one.

Where am I wrong? Regards. Alexyangfox (talk) 03:06, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found out why! Because the sum of the elements in a PSF is one .Alexyangfox (talk) 03:24, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"flipped"?

[edit]

Is "flipped" some formal matrix operation that I should know about? Sounds more like something for pancakes.

2600:1700:C280:3FD0:8058:E8A0:B837:8E95 (talk) 16:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Formally, it's the adjoint from:
where . So the order of rows and columns of a matrix get "flipped." Maybe it can be clearer in the text. Maqifrnswa (talk) 21:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Derivation

[edit]

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Richardson%E2%80%93Lucy_deconvolution&diff=next&oldid=1094544109

Could we maybe be more constructive on my this derivation is getting nuked repeatedly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.0.78 (talk) 21:39, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]