1. Field of the Invention
The present invention generally relates to image processing, and more particularly to tile-based belief propagation.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Energy (or cost) minimization on a Markov Random Field (MRF) is commonly applied to assign an optimal label to each node (pixel or block of pixels) of a scene representation in computer vision or image processing. A label stands for a local quantity of the state (or status) of the node. For example, the label may stand for the depth value of the node, or may stand for either foreground or background. There are two energy terms in the energy minimization: a data term Ed and a smoothness term Es. The data term Ed penalizes the inconsistency between the labels and the observed data. In other words, for example, the data term Ed should be increased when the labels and the observed data are inconsistent and vice versa. The smoothness term Es favors the spatial coherence of the labels. In other words, for example, the smoothness term Es should be decreased when the neighboring labels are consistent and vice versa. The optimal labels {lp} are the labels that minimize the combination of these two energy terms,
where P is the set of all nodes and G is a specified neighborhood, such as the 4-nearest neighboring pixels.
Many algorithms have been proposed for finding the optimal label assignment as formulated in the energy minimization. Among the algorithms, belief propagation (BP) has become a popular technique for solving computer vision problems, such as stereo estimation and image denoising. The belief propagation has high potential for hardware implementation due to its high degree of parallelism and regularity of memory access. However, the belief propagation requires large amounts of memory and bandwidth, therefore forbidding straightforward hardware implementation.
As the original belief propagation could not be effectively implemented in hardware, a need has arisen to propose a modified belief propagation which has similar performance but with much lower bandwidth and memory requirements than the original BP algorithm.
In view of the foregoing, it is an object of the present invention to provide a tile-based belief propagation, which is more suitable for hardware implementation than the original belief propagation due to the substantially reduced memory and bandwidth consumption.
According to one embodiment of the present invention, an image is first split into a number of tiles. Messages are then iteratively generated by a message computing device (such as a parallel processor) within each of the tiles, based on the messages from neighboring pixels to the tile at a previous iteration, wherein each message represents information of a state of the pixel. The generated messages for sending out of the tiles are stored, for example, in a memory. Labels are finally determined in a belief decision device based on the stored messages, wherein each label represents the state of the pixel.
According to the embodiment, in step 10, the whole image is split into non-overlapping tiles of pixels.
The pseudocode has a two-level structure: outer and inner iterations. In the outer iteration, the tiles are first processed in a raster scan order (beginning at line 3 of the pseudocode), and the tiles are then processed in an inverse-raster scan order (beginning at line 9 of the pseudocode).
For each tile, the messages from other tiles (i.e., the arrows shown in
where Np is the set of the neighbors of p.
Specifically, at iteration t, each node p sends the resultant message Mpqt to its neighbor q. Mpqt (1) encodes the opinion of p about assigning label 1q to q. The message Mpqt at iteration t from p to q is constructed using the messages from neighbors to p at iteration t−1.
After Ti inner iterations (lines 6-7 of the pseudocode), the messages Mpqt for sending out of the tile are stored (in step 12).
As the tiles are processed in the raster/inverse-raster scan order, the messages are thus iteratively propagated. At the T0 outer iteration (that is, the end of the raster scan and the inverse-raster scan), the best labels are determined (in step 13) using the following equation (3) in line 14 of the pseudocode.
where L is the set of all labels.
After enough iterations, say T (a number), the label of node p is determined based on the local likelihood (i.e., the data term Ed) and the messages Mp′pT from the neighbors.
According to the embodiment, the BP has the following advantages for hardware implementation. First, it is highly parallel. In message passing, each node loads the messages from the previous iteration, operates independently, and generates new messages. Second, it only uses simple operations such as additions and comparisons. Third, the memory access is regular. If the message is updated sequentially, the required input data can be streamed into the processor with ease.
After Ti inner iterations (lines 6-7 of the pseudocode), the messages {Mpqt} for sending out of the tile are stored in the memory 602. Subsequently, at the T0 outer iteration, a belief decision device 603 determines the best labels {lp} based on the messages Mp′pT from the neighbors. Finally, an output device 604 generates a label map (such as a depth map or a motion vector map) according to the determined labels {lp}.
Table 1 compares the memory and bandwidth consumption of the original belief propagation and the tile-based belief propagation of the present embodiment.
Although specific embodiments have been illustrated and described, it can be appreciated by those skilled in the art that various modifications may be made without departing from the scope of the present invention, which is intended to be limited solely by the appended claims.
The present application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/119,333 filed on Dec. 2, 2008, the complete subject matter of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
7502521 | Sun et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7599547 | Sun et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
20090164192 | Yu | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20110285701 | Chen et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100135585 A1 | Jun 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61119333 | Dec 2008 | US |