Multi-scale Convolution Combined with Adaptive Bi-interval Equalization for Image Enhancement

Table 1. Running time of MSC with different parameters and En、EPI of images processed by MSC
View table
View in Article
Table 1. Running time of MSC with different parameters and En、EPI of images processed by MSC
Kernels Scales En EPI Time
3 0.1, 0.5, 1 5.63 4.20 0.28
6 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9, 1 6.39 4.96 0.53
9 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.9, 1 6.41 5.01 0.81

Table 2. AG, EME, and En of enhanced images by BABHE with different $γ$

View table

View in Article

Table 2. AG, EME, and En of enhanced images by BABHE with different $γ$

$γ$	AG	EME	En
0	3.435 3	4.369 8	5.360 3
0.1	3.436 8	4.370 0	5.444 5
0.2	3.444 0	4.421 2	5.598 6
0.3	3.685 0	4.632 8	5.685 6
0.4	4.232 0	5.002 1	6.002 3
0.5	4.498 5	5.332 3	6.112 3
0.6	4.902 1	5.952 0	6.399 8
0.7	5.253 6	6.232 9	6.860 0
0.8	6.360 2	7.033 4	7.368 8
0.9	4.553 6	5.369 8	6.998 5
1	4.033 2	5.332 0	6.523 0

Table 4. Running time of different algorithms and EME, En and AG of processed image by different algorithms

View table

View in Article

Table 4. Running time of different algorithms and EME, En and AG of processed image by different algorithms

Image	Evaluation index	Original	BBHE	HEEF	DOTHE	RLBHE	FCCE	Wan	Our
Image A	EME	5.219 7	6.959 3	12.022 9	8.069 1	3.893 2	7.998 5	2.144 6	15.139 1
	En	7.071 1	7.293 5	6.773 2	7.639 2	6.526 1	7.117 2	6.839 9	7.846 8
	AG	3.586 3	5.154 7	6.296 3	6.398 6	2.531 5	3.999 7	3.685 3	13.718 8
	t	-	0.632 5	0.017 8	11.176 6	0.867 2	0.423 0	58.029 5	16.536 5
Image B	EME	1.457 2	8.454 9	3.477 8	9.195 0	2.856 0	7.222 9	0.951 0	13.466 6
	En	5.820 8	7.642 5	5.690 6	7.655 7	6.614 2	7.535 8	5.857 8	7.525 4
	AG	2.415 9	9.283 0	4.529 0	8.876 2	4.833 9	8.196 0	2.467 7	15.863 7
	t	-	0.510 3	0.012 9	12.364 4	0.908 0	0.392 1	56.983 3	16.145 2
Image C	EME	1.832 2	6.415 3	2.024 7	5.273 4	1.816 7	1.655 3	1.133 2	7.067 9
	En	5.039 1	7.523 9	3.857 2	7.856 0	6.144 5	5.768 3	5.533 6	7.163 3
	AG	1.142 6	6.099 0	0.740 0	7.864 3	2.433 2	5.363 9	1.337 5	11.988 4
	t	-	0.600 2	0.150 4	16.010 4	1.017 2	0.446 8	52.362 3	16.688 0
Image D	EME	3.178 9	8.685 8	9.287 2	7.347 4	3.094 6	2.095 5	0.941 0	17.322 8
	En	5.468 1	6.895 0	5.317 3	7.634 1	5.589 2	5.874 1	5.409 6	7.290 4
	AG	1.782 0	5.341 9	4.156 7	5.709 2	1.243 6	2.104 9	2.203 5	13.991 8
	t	-	0.663 5	0.018 5	14.450 0	1.106 0	0.432 0	61.036 5	14.064 7
Image E	EME	0.821 4	7.209 9	2.063 2	6.452 3	2.391 0	4.575 7	0.767 1	12.594 9
	En	5.425 6	6.766 1	5.250 1	7.762 5	6.617 1	7.650 5	7.310 3	7.809 1
	AG	1.001 5	3.088 8	2.021 9	6.523 1	2.442 5	5.435 4	4.785 2	11.516 9
	t	-	0.234 5	0.011 2	9.972 4	0.869 3	0.274 0	58.258 0	10.694 6
Image F	EME	13.446 1	23.586 9	75.901 7	32.311 5	23.540 1	26.066 4	4.360 1	90.252 5
	En	6.587 4	7.014 2	6.321 8	7.306 8	6.409 3	7.403 0	6.331 5	7.540 3
	AG	7.845 0	9.748 9	22.313 3	19.900 7	11.317 3	14.236 5	6.889 9	53.617 7
	t	-	0.223 5	0.006 6	7.011 6	0.678 6	0.139 8	22.406 9	6.303 9

Table 4. Objective evaluation of image quality after enhancement processing by each algorithm
View table
View in Article
Table 4. Objective evaluation of image quality after enhancement processing by each algorithm
Original image HEEF BBHE BABHE
Average grays 57 46 68 88
Number of gray levels 232 254 256 256
En 6.635 7 6.554 3 7.272 4 7.368 8

Table 5. Running time of each stage of the algorithm in this paper

View table

View in Article

Table 5. Running time of each stage of the algorithm in this paper

Input	MSC/s	BABHE/s	ALL/s	LF/s
Image A	0.615 9	15.485 4	0.058 7	0.376 5
Image B	0.577 8	15.504 4	0.060 3	0.001 3
Image C	0.553 3	16.032 5	0.068 5	0.033 6
Image D	0.602 3	13.336 2	0.060 3	0.065 9
Image E	0.583 8	10.048 2	0.061 7	0.000 9
Image F	0.360 3	5.881 6	0.061 4	0.000 6

Tools

Get Citation

Copy Citation Text

Hao-xiang LU, Zhen-bing LIU, Peng-yue GUO, Xi-peng PAN. Multi-scale Convolution Combined with Adaptive Bi-interval Equalization for Image Enhancement[J]. Acta Photonica Sinica, 2020, 49(10): 1010002

Download Citation

EndNote(RIS)BibTex Plain Text

Set citation alerts for article

Save article for my favorites

Paper Information

Category: Image Processing

Received: Jun. 30, 2020

Accepted: Aug. 28, 2020

Published Online: Mar. 10, 2021

The Author Email:

DOI:10.3788/gzxb20204910.1010002

Topics

laser devices and laser physics

Lasers and Laser Optics

Laser physics

laser manufacturing

Instrumentation, Measurement and Metrology

Table 1. Running time of MSC with different parameters and En、EPI of images processed by MSC

Table 1. Running time of MSC with different parameters and En、EPI of images processed by MSC

Table 2. AG, EME, and En of enhanced images by BABHE with different γ

Table 2. AG, EME, and En of enhanced images by BABHE with different γ

Table 4. Running time of different algorithms and EME, En and AG of processed image by different algorithms

Table 4. Running time of different algorithms and EME, En and AG of processed image by different algorithms

Table 4. Objective evaluation of image quality after enhancement processing by each algorithm

Table 4. Objective evaluation of image quality after enhancement processing by each algorithm

Table 5. Running time of each stage of the algorithm in this paper

Table 5. Running time of each stage of the algorithm in this paper

微信扫一扫：分享

Table 2. AG, EME, and En of enhanced images by BABHE with different $γ$

Table 2. AG, EME, and En of enhanced images by BABHE with different $γ$