2022
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-1806416/v1
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Image Denoising in the Deep Learning Era

Abstract: Over the last decade, the number of digital images captured per day witnessed a massive explosion. Nevertheless, the visual quality of photographs is often degraded by noise during image acquisition or transmission. With the re-emergence of deep neural networks, the performance of image denoising techniques has been substantially improved in recent years. The objective of this paper is to provide a comprehensive survey of recent advances in image denoising techniques based on deep neural networks. In doing so,… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 210 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As can be observed in Figure 6 , the BPI values of the denoised ultrasound images processed using the proposed technique were all high and far above the experimental threshold of 0.45. For denoised ultrasound images, the methods of Saeed Izadi et al (2022) [ 6 ], Thayammal et al (2021) [ 5 ], and Sujeet More et al (2021) [ 8 ] achieve BPI values of 0.40–0.45. For ultrasound images, the Nguyen Thanh-Trung et al (2021) [ 11 ] method has a lower BPI, with a maximum value of just 0.33, while the Dihan Zheng et al (2021) [ 14 ] algorithm consistently has a BPI below 0.2.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As can be observed in Figure 6 , the BPI values of the denoised ultrasound images processed using the proposed technique were all high and far above the experimental threshold of 0.45. For denoised ultrasound images, the methods of Saeed Izadi et al (2022) [ 6 ], Thayammal et al (2021) [ 5 ], and Sujeet More et al (2021) [ 8 ] achieve BPI values of 0.40–0.45. For ultrasound images, the Nguyen Thanh-Trung et al (2021) [ 11 ] method has a lower BPI, with a maximum value of just 0.33, while the Dihan Zheng et al (2021) [ 14 ] algorithm consistently has a BPI below 0.2.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Graphical view of image noise removal comparison chart of proposed and state-of-art methods [ 5 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 14 ]. …”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Neural networks, unlike traditional algorithms, can automatically learn features from signals and adaptively adjust model parameters, making them more suitable for handling complex and dynamic signals in real-world settings [20], [21]. In [12], variants of GRU, LSTM, and RNN neural networks are used for denoising accelerometer signals, achieving better results compared to traditional methods.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Inspired by the latest breakthroughs in selfsupervised image denoising [6][7][8][9][10], we propose in this paper an enhanced version of the automatic switch process which determines the appropriate depth value using both local and global information. The method involves extracting multiple depth maps from a reconstruction volume using various focus measures and patch sizes, then training a neural network in a selfsupervised manner to identify the depth map with the lowest average deviation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%