Skip to main content
edited tags; edited title
Link
Royi
  • 20.5k
  • 4
  • 199
  • 240

Gradient of total variationTotal Variation of magnitudeMagnitude of complex functionComplex Function for denoisingDenoising

Notice removed Authoritative reference needed by Stiefel
Bounty Ended with Arrigo's answer chosen by Stiefel
Notice added Authoritative reference needed by Stiefel
Bounty Started worth 50 reputation by Stiefel
Clarified
Source Link
Stiefel
  • 123
  • 7

Gradient of total variation of magnitude of complex function for denoising

Say I have a complex function $f$$f^*$ (e.g. a MRI image) that has a near piece-wise constant magnitude, but a non constant phase.

If I have an optimization problem to find $f^*$ and set up an objective function with a total variation term (e.g. for denoising or compressed sensing) it usually has the following form:

$$ obj_1(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(f) $$

However, since I assume that $f$ has a piece-wise constant magnitude, I think it might be better to use:

$$ obj_2(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(|f|) $$

However, for a gradient based solver, one would have to know the gradient of obj2. The gradient for $obj_1(f)$ is: $\text{TV}'\left(TV(f)\right)$. What is the gradient of $obj_2(f)$?

Update:

Intuitively I would assume something like the following (since the phase has no influence on $obj_2$, leave the phase "untouched"):

$$ \text{TV}'\left(TV(|f|)\right)* e^{i \arg(f)} $$

However, my knowledge in complex analysis is very limited and I am not sure if this makes sense.

Gradient of total variation of magnitude of complex function

Say I have a complex function $f$ that has a near piece-wise constant magnitude, but a non constant phase.

If I have an objective function with a total variation term (e.g. for denoising or compressed sensing) it usually has the following form:

$$ obj_1(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(f) $$

However, since I assume that $f$ has a piece-wise constant magnitude, I think it might be better to use:

$$ obj_2(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(|f|) $$

However, for a gradient based solver, one would have to know the gradient of obj2. The gradient for $obj_1(f)$ is: $\text{TV}'\left(TV(f)\right)$. What is the gradient of $obj_2(f)$?

Update:

Intuitively I would assume something like the following (since the phase has no influence on $obj_2$, leave the phase "untouched"):

$$ \text{TV}'\left(TV(|f|)\right)* e^{i \arg(f)} $$

However, my knowledge in complex analysis is very limited and I am not sure if this makes sense.

Gradient of total variation of magnitude of complex function for denoising

Say I have a complex function $f^*$ (e.g. a MRI image) that has a near piece-wise constant magnitude, but a non constant phase.

If I have an optimization problem to find $f^*$ and set up an objective function with a total variation term (e.g. for denoising or compressed sensing) it usually has the following form:

$$ obj_1(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(f) $$

However, since I assume that $f$ has a piece-wise constant magnitude, I think it might be better to use:

$$ obj_2(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(|f|) $$

However, for a gradient based solver, one would have to know the gradient of obj2. The gradient for $obj_1(f)$ is: $\text{TV}'\left(TV(f)\right)$. What is the gradient of $obj_2(f)$?

Update:

Intuitively I would assume something like the following (since the phase has no influence on $obj_2$, leave the phase "untouched"):

$$ \text{TV}'\left(TV(|f|)\right)* e^{i \arg(f)} $$

However, my knowledge in complex analysis is very limited and I am not sure if this makes sense.

deleted 3 characters in body
Source Link
Stiefel
  • 123
  • 7

Say I have a complex function $f$ that has a near piece-wise constant magnitude, but a non constant phase.

If I have an objective function with a total variation term (e.g. for denoising or compressed sensing) it usually has the following form:

$$ obj_1(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(f) $$

However, since I assume that $f$ has a piece-wise constant magnitude, I think it might be better to use:

$$ obj_2(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(|f|) $$

However, for a gradient based solver, one would have to know the gradient of obj2. The gradient for $obj_1(f)$ is: $\text{TV}'\left(TV(f)\right)$. What is the gradient of $obj_2(f)$?

-- UpdateUpdate:

Intuitively I would suggestassume something like this, sincethe following (since the phase has no influence on the objective function$obj_2$, I would leave the phase "untouched"):

$$ \text{TV}'\left(TV(|f|)\right)* e^{i \arg(f)} $$

However, my knowledge in complex analysis is very limited and I am not sure if this makes sense.

Say I have a complex function $f$ that has a near piece-wise constant magnitude, but a non constant phase.

If I have an objective function with a total variation term (e.g. for denoising or compressed sensing) it usually has the following form:

$$ obj_1(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(f) $$

However, since I assume that $f$ has a piece-wise constant magnitude, I think it might be better to use:

$$ obj_2(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(|f|) $$

However, for a gradient based solver, one would have to know the gradient of obj2. The gradient for $obj_1(f)$ is: $\text{TV}'\left(TV(f)\right)$. What is the gradient of $obj_2(f)$?

-- Update:

Intuitively I would suggest something like this, since the phase has no influence on the objective function, I would leave the phase "untouched":

$$ \text{TV}'\left(TV(|f|)\right)* e^{i \arg(f)} $$

However, my knowledge in complex analysis is very limited and I am not sure if this makes sense.

Say I have a complex function $f$ that has a near piece-wise constant magnitude, but a non constant phase.

If I have an objective function with a total variation term (e.g. for denoising or compressed sensing) it usually has the following form:

$$ obj_1(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(f) $$

However, since I assume that $f$ has a piece-wise constant magnitude, I think it might be better to use:

$$ obj_2(f) = \ldots + \text{TV}(|f|) $$

However, for a gradient based solver, one would have to know the gradient of obj2. The gradient for $obj_1(f)$ is: $\text{TV}'\left(TV(f)\right)$. What is the gradient of $obj_2(f)$?

Update:

Intuitively I would assume something like the following (since the phase has no influence on $obj_2$, leave the phase "untouched"):

$$ \text{TV}'\left(TV(|f|)\right)* e^{i \arg(f)} $$

However, my knowledge in complex analysis is very limited and I am not sure if this makes sense.

Added suggestion
Source Link
Stiefel
  • 123
  • 7
Loading
added 11 characters in body
Source Link
Stiefel
  • 123
  • 7
Loading
cleaned up equations
Source Link
Jason R
  • 24.8k
  • 2
  • 70
  • 74
Loading
Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackSignals/status/264033393187098626
Added tags
Link
Stiefel
  • 123
  • 7
Loading
added 44 characters in body
Source Link
Stiefel
  • 123
  • 7
Loading
Source Link
Stiefel
  • 123
  • 7
Loading