Effect of image compression in model and human performance

We applied three different model observers (non-prewhitening matched filter with an eye filter, Hotelling and channelized Hotelling) to predict the effect of JPEG image compression on human visual detection of a simulated lesion (clinically known as thrombus) in single frame digital x-ray coronary angiograms. Since the model observers' absolute performance is better than human, model performance was degraded to match human performance by injecting internal noise proportional to the external noise. All three model-observers predicted reasonably well the degradation in human performance as a function of JPEG image compression, although the NPWEW and the channelized Hotelling models (with internal noise proportional to the external noise) were better predictors than the Hotelling model.

[1]  Kenneth E. Weaver,et al.  An Assortment Of Image Quality Indexes For Radiographic Film-Screen Combinations ---Can They Be Resolved? , 1972, Other Conferences.

[2]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Stabilized estimates of Hotelling-observer detection performance in patient-structured noise , 1998, Medical Imaging.

[3]  Bruce Kuo Ting Ho,et al.  Three-dimensional transform compression of images from dynamic studies , 1990, Medical Imaging.

[4]  M. Webster,et al.  Contrast adaptation and the spatial structure of natural images. , 1997, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[5]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  Psychophysical evaluation of the effect of JPEG, full-frame discrete cosine transform (DCT) and wavelet image compression on signal detection in medical image noise , 1995, Medical Imaging.

[6]  S Marcelja,et al.  Mathematical description of the responses of simple cortical cells. , 1980, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[7]  R. F. Wagner,et al.  Efficiency of human visual signal discrimination. , 1981, Science.

[8]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Lesion detection in structured noise. , 1995, Academic radiology.

[9]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. I. Effect of number of possible spatial locations and signal contrast. , 1996, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[10]  H. Kundel,et al.  The influence of structured noise on the detection of radiologic abnormalities. , 1974, Investigative radiology.

[11]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detection. II. Signal-location identification. , 1984, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[12]  Kenneth G. Morris,et al.  Lossy (15:1) JPEG Compression of Digital Coronary Angiograms Does Not Limit Detection of Subtle Morphological Features , 1996 .

[13]  B. Harrawood,et al.  Compression of digital coronary angiograms does not affect visual or quantitative assessment of coronary artery stenosis severity. , 1996, The American journal of cardiology.

[14]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detectability with two noise components: anomalous masking effects. , 1997, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[15]  C E Metz,et al.  Digital image processing: effect on detectability of simulated low-contrast radiographic patterns. , 1984, Radiology.

[16]  P F Judy,et al.  Detection of noisy visual targets: Models for the effects of spatial uncertainty and signal-to-noise ratio , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Observer signal-to-noise ratios for the ML-EM algorithm , 1996, Medical Imaging.

[18]  H H Barrett,et al.  Addition of a channel mechanism to the ideal-observer model. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[19]  H. Barrett,et al.  Effect of noise correlation on detectability of disk signals in medical imaging. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[20]  H H Barrett,et al.  Effect of random background inhomogeneity on observer detection performance. , 1992, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[21]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Practical issues and methodology in assessment of image quality using model observers , 1997, Medical Imaging.

[22]  P K Kijewski,et al.  Effects of lossy compression on lesion detection: predictions of the nonprewhitening matched filter. , 1998, Medical physics.

[23]  A. Burgess Statistically defined backgrounds: performance of a modified nonprewhitening observer model. , 1994, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[24]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detection. IV. Observer inconsistency. , 1988, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.