Cited by 17,949Image and Signal Denoising MethodsAdvanced Image Processing TechniquesImage Enhancement Techniques

Stochastic relaxation, gibbs distributions, and the bayesian restoration of images.

Geman, Stuart, Geman, Donald·1984·IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

Abstract

We make an analogy between images and statistical mechanics systems. Pixel gray levels and the presence and orientation of edges are viewed as states of atoms or molecules in a lattice-like physical system. The assignment of an energy function in the physical system determines its Gibbs distribution. Because of the Gibbs distribution, Markov random field (MRF) equivalence, this assignment also determines an MRF image model. The energy function is a more convenient and natural mechanism for embodying picture attributes than are the local characteristics of the MRF. For a range of degradation mechanisms, including blurring, nonlinear deformations, and multiplicative or additive noise, the posterior distribution is an MRF with a structure akin to the image model. By the analogy, the posterior distribution defines another (imaginary) physical system. Gradual temperature reduction in the physical system isolates low energy states (``annealing''), or what is the same thing, the most probable states under the Gibbs distribution. The analogous operation under the posterior distribution yields the maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimate of the image given the degraded observations. The result is a highly parallel ``relaxation'' algorithm for MAP estimation. We establish convergence properties of the algorithm and we experiment with some simple pictures, for which good restorations are obtained at low signal-to-noise ratios.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tpami.1984.4767596

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Geman, S., & Geman, D.
Affiliations
  • Brown University (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Amherst (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Published
1984-11
Volume
PAMI-6
Issue
6
Pages
721-741
ISSN
0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2020999234
Cited by
17,949
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 202 · 2025: 299 · 2024: 306 · 2023: 335 · 2022: 401 · 2021: 469 · 2020: 471 · 2019: 506 · 2018: 504 · 2017: 512 · 2016: 612 · 2015: 626 · 2014: 705 · 2013: 590 · 2012: 764
FWCI
109.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Signal Denoising Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Enhancement Techniques
Keywords
image restoration, Markov random fields, Boltzmann distribution, stochastic relaxation, annealing, maximum a posteriori estimation, image degradation, blurring, noise, image modeling, statistical mechanics analogy

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