Image Compression Using KLT, Wavelets and an Adaptive Mixture of Principal Components Model

  • Nanda Kambhatla
  • Simon Haykin
  • Robert D. Dony


In this paper, we present preliminary results comparing the nature of the errors introduced by the mixture of principal components (MPC) model with a wavelet transform and the Karhunen Loève transform (KLT) for the lossy compression of brain magnetic resonance (MR) images. MPC, wavelets and KLT were applied to image blocks in a block transform coding scheme. The MPC model partitions the space of image blocks into a set of disjoint classes and computes a separate KLT for each class. In our experiments, though both the wavelet transform and KLT obtained a higher peak signal to noise ratio (PSNR) than MPC, according to radiologists, MPC preserved the texture and boundaries of gray and white matter better than the wavelet transform or KLT.


Brain Magnetic Resonance Image Image Compression Vector Quantization Image Block Lossy Compression 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R.D. Dony and S. Haykin, “Optimally adaptive transform coding”, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Vol. 4, pp. 1358–1370, Oct. 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    G.K. Wallace, “The JPEG still picture compression standard”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 34, pp. 31–44, April 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    K.R. Rao and P. Yip, Discrete Cosine Transform: Algorithms, Advantages and Applications, Academic Press, New York, NY, 1990.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J.N. Bradley, C.M. Brislawn, and T. Hopper, “The FBI wavelet/scalar quantization standard for gray-scale image compression”, in Visual Information Processing II, Vol. 1961 of SPIE Proceedings, Orlando, FL, pp. 293–304, April 1993.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R.B. Pinter and B. Nabet, Nonlinear Vision, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1992.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. Strang and T. Nguyen, Wavelets and Filter Banks, Wellesley-Cambridge Press, Wellesley, MA, 1996.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Cohen, I.C. Daubechies, and J.C. Feauveau, “Biorthogonal bases of compactly supported wavelets”, Technical Report 11217-900529-07 TM, AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ, May 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    “WSQ gray-scale fingerprint image compression specification”, Technical report, Criminal Justice Information Services, Federal Bureau of Investigation, USA, Feb. 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Gersho and R.M. Gray, Vector Quantization and Signal Compression, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, Massachusetts, 1992.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    R.D. Dony and S. Haykin, “Optimally integrated adaptive learning”, Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, IEEE, pp. I 609–611, April 1993.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R.D. Dony and S. Haykin, “Optimally adaptive transform coding”, IEEE Trans. Image Processing, Vol. 4, pp. 1358–1370, Oct. 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R.D. Dony, “Adaptive transform coding of images using a mixture of principal components”, Ph.D. Thesis, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, July 1995.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    T.D. Sanger, “Optimal unsupervised learning in a single-layer linear feedforward neural network”, Neural Networks, Vol. 2, pp. 459–473, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Haykin, Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation, Macmillan, New York, NY, 1994.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    N. Kambhatla, Local models and Gaussian mixture models for statistical data processing, Ph.D. Thesis, Oregon Graduate Institute of Science & Technology, P.O. Box 91000, Portland, OR 97291-1000, USA, Jan. 1996.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    N. Kambhatla and T.K. Leen, “Fast non-linear dimension reduction”, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 6, Cowan, Tesauro, and Alspector (eds.), Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, California, pp. 152–159, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Domaszewicz and V.A. Vaishampayan, “Structural limitations of self-affine and partially self-affine fractal compression”, Proc. SPIE's Visual Communications and Image Processing, Cambridge, MA, Nov. 1993.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Kohonen, E. Oja, O. Simula, A. Visa, and J. Kangas, “Engineering applications of the self-organizing map”, Proc. IEEE, Vol. 84, pp. 1358–1384, Oct. 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    R.D. Dony, Adaptive transform coding of images using a mixture of principal components, Ph.D. Thesis, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S4K1, Canada, July 1995.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A.N. Netravali and B.G. Haskell, Digital Pictures: Representation and Compression, Plenum Press, New York, NY, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    R.D. Dony and S. Haykin, “Compression of SAR images using KLT, VQ, and mixture of principal components”, accepted to IEE Proceedings—Radar, Sonar and Navigation, 1997.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    N. Jayant, J. Johnston, and R. Safranek, “Signal compression based on models of human perception”, Proc. IEEE, Vol. 81, pp. 1385–1421, Oct. 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    C.J. van den Branden Lambrecht and O. Verscheure, “Perceptual quality measure using a spatialemporal model of the human visual system”, Proceedings of the SPIE, San Jose, CA, Jan. 28– Feb. 2, 1996, Vol. 2668, pp. 450–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    R.D. Dony, “Image compression using adaptive lapped transforms”, accepted to Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nanda Kambhatla
    • 1
  • Simon Haykin
    • 2
  • Robert D. Dony
    • 3
  1. 1.IBM T.J. Watson Research CenterHawthorne
  2. 2.Communications Research LaboratoryMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  3. 3.School of EngineeringUniversity of GuelphGuelphCanada

Personalised recommendations