⎧
⎨
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎡
⎣
⎤
⎦
⎡
⎣
⎤
⎦
⎡
⎢
⎤
⎥
⎡
⎢
⎤
⎥
∑
∑
()= (− ) ( − )
()= (− ) ( − )
()
α
α
α
α
α
α
→
=
(− )
→
=
(−)
Dfx
h
Cfx kh
Dfx
h
Cfx kh
lim
1
1
lim
1
1
,
3
x
GL
x
h
k
xx h
k
k
x
GL
x
h
k
xxh
k
k
0
0
/
0
0
/
0
0
1
1
where
()( )
()
=
α
Γα
ΓΓα
+
+−+
k
kk
1
11
is the generalized binomial coefficient
and
Γ(⋅
is the Gamma function,
α<<
1
,
<<xxx
01
.
The proposed method in this paper is based on G-L definition.
Compared with other two definitions, the G-L de fi nition is more
suitable for image processing because it has only one coefficient
for tuning. In the left G-L fractional calculus definition, the tradi-
tional integer order gradient is extended to a fractional gradient
operator, as a result, the typical Laplace mask is improved by a
fractional differential mask. In addition, because the fractional
calculus takes more characteristics of proximity into account, it's
more similar to optical imaging principle and therefore is more
suitable to avoid staircase artifacts.
2.2. Inverse model with fractional-order total variation
As for the characteristics of signals, the additive noise leads to
the quality degradation, and the convolution blur leads to a blur-
ring effect. Then, the visual performance of images comes to low
resolution because of these noises. Therefore, the mathematical
model of image degradation process can be described as Fig. 1.
In Fig. 1,
()∈
×
ux y,
M
is the original clear image,
(
xy,
denotes
the coordinates of pixel matrix,
(
MN,
represents the width and
height of pixel matrix.
(
ux y,
is captured by the multiplicative
kernel
()∈
×
xy,
MN
, which is similar to the point spread func-
tion.
()∈
×
nx y,
M
is the additive white Gaussian noise,
()∈
×
xy,
M
is the degenerated image).
Generally speaking, the issue of image restoration is an inverse
problem. The classical ROF functional model can be established for
describing this inverse problem
⎡
⎣
⎢
⎤
⎦
⎥
∫
μ
Ω‖∇ ‖ + ‖ − ‖
()
Ω
H
p
u
q
ugdmin
1
.
4
u
p
q
q
q
In this model,
is the regularization parameter, it balances the
noises filter and details protection.
and
denote the degen-
eration image and the restoration image, respectively.
is a linear
sparse operator, while
is the gradient operator or Hamilton
operator.
and
q
define the type of functional model. In addition,
]=[
pq,1,2
defines the
ℓ
1
regularization and
]=[
pq,2,2
defines
the
ℓ
regularization.
Replacing the integer order gradient operator with the frac-
tional gradient operator, the AFOTV model can be represented as
⎡
⎣
⎢
⎤
⎦
⎥
∫
μ
Ω‖∇ ‖ + ‖ − ‖
()
Ω
α
H
p
u
q
ugmin
1
d,
5
u
p
q
q
q
where
α∈( ) ∈R0, 1 ,
.
2.3. Brief description of split Bregman iteration
SBI algorithm is an iterative regularization technique, it is an
improvement of Bregman iteration. An unconstrained SBI algo-
rithm is used to deal with the
−ℓAFOTV
1
in this paper.
General image restoration algorithm is to minimize the energy
function described as
()=()+ ( )
()
uJuQug,,
6
where
(
u
is the energy function,
(
u
is the error item and
(
ug,
is the data fidelity item.
(
u
and
(
ug,
are both the variations of
(
Eu g,
.
According to the forms of fractional variation, it is assumed that
⎧
⎨
⎪
⎪
⎩
⎪
⎪
∫
∫
μ
Ω
Ω
()= ‖−‖
()= ‖∇ ‖
()
Ω
Ω
α
HQu g
q
ug
Ju
p
u
,d
1
d
,
7
q
q
p
q
where
(
u,g
and
(
u
are continuous dimensional and real-va-
lued convex functions, both of which are non-negative and
differentiable.
From the definition of Bregman distance, the Bregman dis-
tances between
and
u
can be expressed as
{}
()=()−()+< −>
()
u u Ju Ju p u u,,,
8
pk k k
where
denotes the sub-gradient of
at
u
, and
{}
∈∂()= ()≥()+< − >
()
p Ju pJu Ju p u u,.
9
kkk
If
is differentiable, then
is the sub-gradient of
at
u
.
2.4. Convergence analysis for split Bregman iteration
Lemma 1.
(
u
and
(
ug,
are two real-valued convex functions,
(
ug,
is differentiable,
()<
u
.
Assuming that
^
=()uQugargmin ,
u
,
()=()+ (
uJuQug,
,
where
(
u
is solvable. Then, the iterative solutions of
(
ug,
are monotonically decreasing, which is expressed as
()≤()
()
+
Qu g Qu g,,.
10
kk1
Proof.
u
converges to the minimum values of
(
ug,
, which is
expressed as.
()≤(
^
)+ (
^
)
()
Qu g Ju
k
Qu g,
1
,.
11
k
Lemma 2.
is the original clean image,
is the degenerated image.
Assuming that.
⎪
⎪
⎧
⎨
⎩
δ(
^
)≤
(
^
)=
()
Qu f
Qu g
,
,0
,
12
2
where
δ
denotes the noise levels, and when it satisfies that
δ()>
+
uf,
k 1
. Then, the Bregman distances between
u
and
u
is
monotonically decreasing, which can infer that
(
^
)< (
^
)
()
+
+
uu uu,,,
13
pk pk1
kk1
where
is the iteration number.
Fig. 1. The image degradation process model.
D. Li et al. / ISA Transactions 82 (2018) 210–222212