Space-frequency quantiser design for ultrasound image compression based on minimum description length criterion



The paper addresses the problem of how the spatial quantisation mode and subband adaptive uniform scalar quantiser can be jointly optimised in the minimum description length (MDL) framework for compression of ultrasound images. It has been shown that the statistics of wavelet coefficients in the medical ultrasound (US) image can be better approximated by the generalised Student t-distribution. By combining these statistics with the operational rate-distortion (RD) criterion, a space-frequency quantiser (SFQ) called the MDL-SFQ was designed, which used an efficient zero-tree quantisation technique for zeroing out the tree-structured sets of wavelet coefficients and an adaptive scalar quantiser to quantise the non-zero coefficients. The algorithm used the statistical ‘variance of quantisation error’ to achieve the different bit-rates ranging from near-lossless to lossy compression. Experimental results showed that the proposed coder outperformed the set partitioning in hierarchical trees (SPIHT) image coder both quantitatively and qualitatively. It yielded an improved compression performance of 1.01 dB over the best zero-tree based coder SPIHIT at 0.25 bits per pixel when averaged over five ultrasound images.


Minimum description length Wavelet coefficients SFQ Scalar quantiser Generalised Student t-distribution Ultrasound image 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Achim, A., Bezerianos, A., andTsakalides, P. (2001): ‘Novel Bayesian multiscale method for speckle removal in medical ultrasound images’,IEEE Trans. Med. Imag.,20, pp. 772–783Google Scholar
  2. Antonini, M., Barlaud, M., Mathieu, P., andDaubechies, I. (1992): ‘Image coding using wavelet transform’,IEEE Trans. Image Process.,1, pp. 205–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barron, A., Rissanen, J., andYu, B. (1998): ‘Minimum description length principle in coding and modeling’,IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, (invited paper),44, pp. 2743–2760CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Berger, T. (1997): ‘Rate distortion theory; a mathematical basis for data compression’, (PH, Engle Wood Cliffs, New Jersy, 1997)Google Scholar
  5. Chang, G., Yu, B., andVetterli, M. (2000): ‘Adaptive wavelet thresholding for image denoising and compression’,IEEE Trans. Image process.,9, pp. 1532–1546MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiu, E., Vaisey, J., andAtkins, S. (2001): ‘Wavelet-based space-frequency compression of ultrasound images’,IEEE Trans. Info. Tech. Biomed.,5, pp. 300–310Google Scholar
  7. Crouse, M., andRamachandran, K. (1997): ‘Joint thresholding and quantizer selection for transform image coding: Entropy constrained analysis and applications to baseline JPEG’,IEEE Trans. Image Process.,6, pp. 285–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gendron, P., andNandran, B. (2001): ‘Modeling heavy tailed correlated noise with packet basis functions’,J. Stat. Planning Infer.,112, pp. 99–114Google Scholar
  9. Kaur, L., Gupta, S., Saxena, S. C., andChauhan, R. C. (2003): ‘Compression of medical ultrasound images using wavelet transform and vector quantization’.IEEE-EMBS Asia Pacific Conf., Japan, pp. 170–171Google Scholar
  10. Kim, Y. H., andModestino, J. W. (1992): ‘Adaptive entropy coded subband coding of images’,IEEE Trans. Image Process.,1, pp. 31–48Google Scholar
  11. Li, J., andLei, S. (1999): ‘An embedded still image coder with rate distortion optimization’,IEEE Trans. Image Process.,8, pp. 913–924Google Scholar
  12. O'hagan, A. (2003): ‘Modeling with heavy-tails. Bayesian Statistics’ (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003), pp. 345–359Google Scholar
  13. Papoulis A. (1991): ‘Probability random variables and stochastic processes’ (MHL, New York, 1991)Google Scholar
  14. Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vellerling, W. T., andFlannery (1992): ‘Numerical recipes in C, 2nd edn’ (Cambridge University Press, 1992)Google Scholar
  15. Przelaskowski, A., Kazubek, M., andJamrogiewicz, T. (1997): ‘Effective wavelet based compression method with adaptive quantization threshold and zero-tree coding’,Proc. SPIE, Multimedia Storage and Archiving System-II,3229, pp. 348–356Google Scholar
  16. Przelaskowski, A. (1998): ‘Fitting quantization scheme to multiresolution detail preserving compression algorithm’,Proc. IEEE, p. 485–488Google Scholar
  17. Rajpoot, N. M., Wilson, R. G., Meyer, F. G., andCoifman, R. R. (2003): ‘Adaptive wavelet packet basis selection for zerotree image coding’,IEEE Trans. Image Prcess.,12, pp. 1460–1471MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Ramabadran, T. V., andChen, K. (1992): ‘The use of contextual information in the reversible compression of medical images’,IEEE Trans. Med. Imag.,11, pp. 185–195Google Scholar
  19. Rissanen, J., andLangdon, G. G. (1981): ‘Universal modeling and coding’,IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory,27, pp. 12–23CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. Roos, P., Viergever, M. A., Vanduke, M. C. A., andPeters, J. H. (1988): ‘Reversible intraframe compression of medical images’,IEEE Trans. Med. Imag.,7, pp. 328–336Google Scholar
  21. Said, A., andPearlman, W. A. (1996): ‘A new fast and efficient image codec based on set partitioning in hierarchical trees’,IEEE Trans. Signal Process.,5, pp. 1303–1310Google Scholar
  22. Sharipo, M. (1993): ‘Embedded image coding using zero trees of wavelet coefficients’,IEEE Trans. Signal Process.,41, pp. 3445–3462.Google Scholar
  23. Tsakalides, P., Reveliotis, P., andNikias, C. L. (2000): ‘Scalar quantization of heavy tailed signals’,IEEE Proc., Vis Image Signal Process.,147, pp. 475–484Google Scholar
  24. Westerink, P. H., Boekee, D. E., Biemond, J., andWood, J. W. (1988): ‘Subband coding of images using vector quantization’,IEEE Trans. Comm.,36 pp. 713–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Xiong, Z., Ramchandran, K., andOrchard, M. T. (1997): ‘Space frequency quantizatino for wavelet image coding’,IEEE Trans. Image Process.,6, p. 677–693Google Scholar
  26. Xiong, Z., Ramchandran, K., andOrchard, M. T. (1998): ‘Wavelet packet image coding using space-frequency quantization’,IEEE Trans. Image Process.,7, pp. 892–898Google Scholar

Copyright information

© FMBE 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering & TechnologyLongowalIndia
  2. 2.Thapar Institute of Engineering & TechnologyPatialaIndia

Personalised recommendations