Efficient deconvolution methods for astronomical imaging: algorithms and IDL-GPU codes

Context. The Richardson-Lucy method is the most popular deconvolution method in astronomy because it preserves the number of counts and the non-negativity of the original object. Regularization is, in general, obtained by an early stopping of Richardson-Lucy iterations. In the case of point-wise objects such as binaries or open star clusters, iterations can be pushed to convergence. However, it is well-known that Richardson-Lucy is an inefficient method. In most cases and, in particular, for low noise levels, acceptable solutions are obtained at the cost of hundreds or thousands of iterations, thus several approaches to accelerating Richardson-Lucy have been proposed. They are mainly based on Richardson-Lucy being a scaled gradient method for the minimization of the Kullback-Leibler divergence, or Csiszar I-divergence, which represents the data-fidelity function in the case of Poisson noise. In this framework, a line search along the descent direction is considered for reducing the number of iterations. Aims. A general optimization method, referred to as the scaled gradient projection method, has been proposed for the constrained minimization of continuously differentiable convex functions. It is applicable to the non-negative minimization of the Kullback-Leibler divergence. If the scaling suggested by Richardson-Lucy is used in this method, then it provides a considerable increase in the efficiency of Richardson-Lucy. Therefore the aim of this paper is to apply the scaled gradient projection method to a number of imaging problems in astronomy such as single image deconvolution, multiple image deconvolution, and boundary effect correction. Methods. Deconvolution methods are proposed by applying the scaled gradient projection method to the minimization of the Kullback-Leibler divergence for the imaging problems mentioned above and the corresponding algorithms are derived and implemented in interactive data language. For all the algorithms, several stopping rules are introduced, including one based on a recently proposed discrepancy principle for Poisson data. To attempt to achieve a further increase in efficiency, we also consider an implementation on graphic processing units. Results. The proposed algorithms are tested on simulated images. The acceleration of scaled gradient projection methods achieved with respect to the corresponding Richardson-Lucy methods strongly depends on both the problem and the specific object to be reconstructed, and in our simulations the improvement achieved ranges from about a factor of 4 to more than 30. Moreover, significant accelerations of up to two orders of magnitude have been observed between the serial and parallel implementations of the algorithms. The codes are available upon request.

[1]  H Lantéri,et al.  A general method to devise maximum-likelihood signal restoration multiplicative algorithms with non-negativity constraints , 2001, Signal Process..

[2]  Mario Bertero,et al.  A simple method for the reduction of boundary effects in the Richardson-Lucy approach to image deconvolution , 2005 .

[3]  J. Borwein,et al.  Two-Point Step Size Gradient Methods , 1988 .

[4]  D S Biggs,et al.  Acceleration of iterative image restoration algorithms. , 1997, Applied optics.

[5]  L. Zanni,et al.  Accelerating gradient projection methods for ℓ1-constrained signal recovery by steplength selection rules , 2009 .

[6]  M. Bertero,et al.  Application of the OS-EM method to the restoration of LBT images , 2000 .

[7]  P. Favati,et al.  Performance analysis of maximum likelihood methods for regularization problems with nonnegativity constraints , 2010 .

[8]  M. Bertero,et al.  Efficient gradient projection methods for edge-preserving removal of Poisson noise , 2009 .

[9]  Roberto Ragazzoni,et al.  LINC-NIRVANA: a Fizeau beam combiner for the large binocular telescope , 2003, SPIE Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.

[10]  L. Lucy An iterative technique for the rectification of observed distributions , 1974 .

[11]  L. Shepp,et al.  Maximum Likelihood Reconstruction for Emission Tomography , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[12]  H. Malcolm Hudson,et al.  Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data , 1994, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[13]  I. Csiszár Why least squares and maximum entropy? An axiomatic approach to inference for linear inverse problems , 1991 .

[14]  Frank Natterer,et al.  Mathematical methods in image reconstruction , 2001, SIAM monographs on mathematical modeling and computation.

[15]  Luca Zanni,et al.  Gradient projection methods for quadratic programs and applications in training support vector machines , 2005, Optim. Methods Softw..

[16]  Marcel Carbillet,et al.  Restoration of interferometric images. III. Efficient Richardson-Lucy methods for LINC-NIRVANA data reduction , 2005 .

[17]  Marcel Carbillet,et al.  Reduction of boundary effects in multiple image deconvolution with an application to LBT LINC-NIRVANA , 2006 .

[18]  P. Green Bayesian reconstructions from emission tomography data using a modified EM algorithm. , 1990, IEEE transactions on medical imaging.

[19]  M. Bertero,et al.  Image deblurring with Poisson data: from cells to galaxies , 2009 .

[20]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Foundations of Image Science , 2003, J. Electronic Imaging.

[21]  Luca Zanni,et al.  A discrepancy principle for Poisson data , 2010 .

[22]  Bin Zhou,et al.  Gradient Methods with Adaptive Step-Sizes , 2006, Comput. Optim. Appl..

[23]  Roberto Ragazzoni,et al.  Layer-oriented simulation tool. , 2004, Applied optics.

[24]  S. Bonettini,et al.  Nonnegative image reconstruction from sparse Fourier data: a new deconvolution algorithm , 2010 .

[25]  Alessandra Staglianò,et al.  Analysis of an approximate model for Poisson data reconstruction and a related discrepancy principle , 2011 .

[26]  Robert J. Hanisch,et al.  The restoration of HST images and spectra - II , 2015 .

[27]  Mario Bertero,et al.  Imaging with LINC-NIRVANA, the Fizeau interferometer of the Large Binocular Telescope: state of the art and open problems , 2011 .

[28]  H. Lantéri,et al.  Penalized maximum likelihood image restoration with positivity constraints:multiplicative algorithms , 2002 .

[29]  Valeria Ruggiero,et al.  Iterative regularization algorithms for constrained image deblurring on graphics processors , 2010, J. Glob. Optim..

[30]  William H. Richardson,et al.  Bayesian-Based Iterative Method of Image Restoration , 1972 .

[31]  Alfredo N. Iusem Convergence analysis for a multiplicatively relaxed EM algorithm , 1991 .

[32]  M. Bertero,et al.  Nonnegative least-squares image deblurring: improved gradient projection approaches , 2010 .

[33]  L. Zanni,et al.  New adaptive stepsize selections in gradient methods , 2008 .

[34]  L. Zanni,et al.  A scaled gradient projection method for constrained image deblurring , 2008 .