Optics and Precision Engineering, Volume. 33, Issue 9, 1481(2025)

Infrared and visible image fusion based on HMSD and improved PCNN

Pengbai REN1、*, Huiyun LEI2, Jianwu DANG1,2, Yangping WANG2, Qiming LIU3, and Li YANG3
Author Affiliations
  • 1National Virtual Simulation Experiment Teaching Center for Rail Transit Information and Control,Lanzhou Jiaotong University, Lanzhou730070, China
  • 2School of Electronic and Information Engineering, Lanzhou Jiaotong University, Lanzhou730070, China
  • 3Gansu Xinwangtong Technology Information Co., Ltd, Lanzhou70070, China
  • show less
    Figures & Tables(17)
    Structure model of FAGF
    Hybrid multi-scale decomposition model
    Filter results
    Simplified PCNN neuron modal
    Ablation experiment results of SML-PCNN
    Ablation experiment results of swish-PCNN
    Architecture of infrared and visible image fusion algorithm based HMSD and improved PCNN
    Decomposition series analysis
    Comparison of experimental result of different algorithms
    Difference graph analysis
    Line charts of indicators of 20 groups of image on TNO dataset
    Line charts of indicators of 20 groups of image on MSRS dataset
    Results of ablation experiments
    [in Chinese]
    • Table 1. Average value of fusion results of 20 groups on TNO dataset

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 1. Average value of fusion results of 20 groups on TNO dataset

      MethodSFENQabfPSNRVIFFSTD
      CMSCA0.028 46.883 10.451 061.278 20.896 09.345 7
      GF0.017 67.023 50.317 960.897 20.891 59.477 0
      GSF0.021 16.713 90.243 360.462 50.697 49.369 4
      RGF0.037 87.024 40.470 160.864 51.039 79.742 8
      PIAFusion0.028 16.688 70.479 860.985 30.869 19.015 1
      PSFusion0.038 56.766 00.461 362.641 90.830 79.036 3
      SDCFusion0.025 47.041 90.414 061.128 70.959 69.829 9
      SeAFusion0.036 76.833 30.427 860.851 30.845 49.513 7
      HMSD0.042 27.053 40.515 362.818 40.907 210.242 8
    • Table 2. Average value of fusion results of 20 groups on MSRS dataset

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 2. Average value of fusion results of 20 groups on MSRS dataset

      MethodSFENQabfPSNRVIFFSTD
      CMSCA0.037 86.801 30.457 163.432 40.777 69.184 5
      GF0.025 46.931 30.346 963.209 00.778 99.304 1
      GSF0.025 76.430 70.363 261.371 90.623 38.230 8
      RGF0.051 77.117 80.485 761.653 50.866 79.409 2
      PIAFusion0.043 46.907 50.504 061.925 20.854 49.158 1
      PSFusion0.057 06.958 30.485 563.616 10.782 99.078 8
      SDCFusion0.037 86.925 90.414 962.634 20.814 59.418 3
      SeAFusion0.050 06.582 00.440 463.021 20.711 08.689 6
      HMSD0.058 97.173 70.525 864.064 20.919 910.009 5
    • Table 3. Quantitative analysis of ablation experiments

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 3. Quantitative analysis of ablation experiments

      ImageQabfPSNRVIFF
      f10.346 963.209 00.746 4
      f20.363 261.371 90.802 2
      f30.485 761.653 50.818 5
      f40.504 061.925 20.815 3
      f50.485 563.616 10.805 9
      f60.414 962.634 20.803 5
      Fusion image0.507 163.637 40.826 9
    Tools

    Get Citation

    Copy Citation Text

    Pengbai REN, Huiyun LEI, Jianwu DANG, Yangping WANG, Qiming LIU, Li YANG. Infrared and visible image fusion based on HMSD and improved PCNN[J]. Optics and Precision Engineering, 2025, 33(9): 1481

    Download Citation

    EndNote(RIS)BibTexPlain Text
    Save article for my favorites
    Paper Information

    Category:

    Received: Feb. 11, 2025

    Accepted: --

    Published Online: Jul. 22, 2025

    The Author Email: Pengbai REN (renpb@mail.lzjtu.cn)

    DOI:10.37188/OPE.20253309.1481

    Topics