Optimal Wavelet Filters Selection for Ultrasound and Mammography Compression

  • Volodymyr Ponomaryov
  • Jose Luis. Sanchez-Ramirez
  • Cristina Juarez-Landin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5197)

Abstract

The analysis of different Wavelets also including novel Wavelets families based on atomic functions are presented, especially for Ultrasound (US) and Mammography (MG) images compression. This way we have been able to determine what type of filters Wavelet works better in compression of such images. Key properties: Frequency response, Approximation Order, Projection cosine, and Riesz bounds were determined and compared for the classic Wavelets W9/7 used in standard JPEG2000, Daubechies8, Symlet8, as well as for the complex Kravchenko–Rvachev wavelets ψ(t) based on the Atomic Functions up(t), fup 2 (t), and eup(t). The comparison results show significantly better performance of novel Wavelets that is justified by experiments and in study of key properties.

Keywords

Wavelet Transform Compression Atomic Functions Ultrasound images Mammography images 

References

  1. 1.
    Jähne, B.: Practical Handbook on Image Processing for Scientific and Technical Applications. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2004)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sanchez, J.L., Ponomaryov, V.: Wavelet Compression Applying Different Threshold Types for Ultrasound and Mammography Images. GESTS Intern. Trans. on Computer Sciences and Engineering 39(1), 15–24 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yu, G., Kravchenko, V., Pustovoit, V.: A New Class of WA-Systems of Kravchenko–Rvachev Functions. Doklady Mathematics 75(2), 325–332 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jan, J.: Medical Image Processing, Reconstruction and Restoration: Concepts and Methods. Taylor & Francis/ CRC Press (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vetterli, M., Kovacevic, J.: Wavelets and Subband Coding. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1995)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Villemoes, L.: Wavelet analysis of refinement equations. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 25(5), 1433–1460 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Meyer, Y.: Ondelettes, Hermann, Paris, France (1990)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Unser, M., Aldroubi, A.: A general sampling theory for nonideal acquisition devices. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 42(11), 2915–2925 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Strang, G., Nguyen, T.Q.: Wavelets and Filter Banks. Wellesley-Cambridge Press, Cambridge (1996)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ponomaryov, V., Sanchez-Ramirez, J.L., Juarez-Landin, C.: Evaluation and Optimization of the Standard JPEG2000 for Compression of Ultrasound Images. Telecommunications and Radio Engineering 65(11), 1005–1017 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Volodymyr Ponomaryov
    • 1
  • Jose Luis. Sanchez-Ramirez
    • 1
  • Cristina Juarez-Landin
    • 1
  1. 1.National Polytechnic Institute of MexicoMexico, D.F.Mexico

Personalised recommendations