Cited by 6Advanced Image Processing TechniquesImage Processing Techniques and ApplicationsImage and Video Quality Assessment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Accurate retrieval of region of interest for estimating point spread function and image deblurring

Mohd Shapri, Ahmad Husni, Abdullah, Mohd Zaid·2017·The Imaging Science Journal

Abstract

Extraction of an optimal region of interest (ROI) is crucial in many image processing applications, such as estimation of the point spread function (PSF) and blind deconvolution (BD). Although the amount of publications on PSF and BD is quite extensive; however, the work on ROI estimation has not received much attention. Existing methods which used heuristic models are not only time-consuming but also computationally expensive. In this paper, we proposed a new ROI retrieval scheme based on image partitioning and entropy measurement feedback. This method has low computation cost since it contains no matrix operations. Comprehensive experiments on real and synthetic datasets revealed that the proposed method is competitive when compared with existing search techniques, averaging at 26.1 dB, 0.46 and 1.44 on peak signal-to-noise ratio, universal image quality index and error ratio scales, respectively. On average, the proposed method takes less than 10 s to retrieve the ROI which is significantly faster compared to established solution.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13682199.2017.1341457

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. 10.1109/LGRS.2013.2281827 · DOI
  2. 10.1109/TMI.2013.2255883 · DOI
  3. Hwang YT, 2015, International Conference on Consumer Electronics, 388
  4. 10.1080/09500340.2015.1074738 · DOI
  5. 10.1109/TBME.2011.2174235 · DOI
  6. 10.1145/1618452.1618491 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.image.2013.05.001 · DOI
  8. 10.1080/13682199.2016.1157955 · DOI
  9. 10.1137/040605412 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1109/TPAMI.2015.2481418 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1007/s11263-015-0821-1 · DOI
  12. Min BS, 2013, Int J Softw Eng Appl, 7, 113
  13. 10.1017/S0960129512000783 · DOI
  14. 10.1179/136821910X12863757400240 · DOI
  15. 10.1109/97.995823 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1109/TPAMI.2011.148 · DOI
  17. 10.1007/s11263-014-0727-3 · DOI
  18. 10.1109/TIP.2015.2478407 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 6

Metadata

Authors
Mohd Shapri, A. H., & Abdullah, M. Z.
Affiliations
  • School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia
  • Universiti Sains Malaysia (MY)
Corresponding author
Abdullah, Mohd Zaid
Venue
The Imaging Science Journal
Published
2017-07-12
Volume
65
Issue
6
Pages
327-348
ISSN
  • 1368-2199 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-131X
OpenAlex
W2735509631
Cited by
6
References
1
Citations by year
2023: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Imaging Science Journal (publishedVersion)
Funders
RUI
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Image Processing Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Video Quality Assessment
Keywords
point spread function estimation, blind deconvolution, image deblurring, image segmentation, computational efficiency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review