Table 2 Statistical comparison of noise level estimation on the six representative images in Fig. 4 between different methods
From: Superpixel-based image noise variance estimation with local statistical assessment
JI96 | Z&W09 | MLS09 | SVD13 | Ours | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
σ a | σ e ± std. | ε r (%) | σ e ± std. | ε r (%) | σ e ± std. | ε r (%) | σ e ± std. | ε r (%) | σ e ± std. | ε r (%) |
1 | 5.15 ± 2.15 | 415.23 | 0.92 ± 0.71 | 58.62 | 1.60 ± 0.36 | 59.91 | 1.75 ± 0.92 | 96.18 | 1.22 ± 0.48 | 38.12 |
3 | 5.97 ± 1.86 | 99.03 | 2.16 ± 1.34 | 35.92 | 3.18 ± 0.20 | 6.79 | 3.24 ± 0.61 | 17.53 | 3.20 ± 0.27 | 10.26 |
5 | 7.25 ± 1.56 | 44.98 | 4.3 ± 0.88 | 15.81 | 5.08 ± 0.22 | 3.64 | 5.08 ± 0.43 | 6.70 | 4.83 ± 0.37 | 6.27 |
7 | 8.77 ± 1.30 | 25.34 | 6.15 ± 0.84 | 12.25 | 7.04 ± 0.36 | 3.84 | 7.01 ± 0.36 | 3.76 | 7.34 ± 1.01 | 8.65 |
10 | 11.28 ± 1.00 | 12.80 | 8.89 ± 0.91 | 11.06 | 9.95 ± 0.46 | 3.34 | 9.97 ± 0.30 | 2.11 | 9.72 ± 0.57 | 5.85 |
15 | 15.79 ± 0.69 | 5.26 | 13.52 ± 1.06 | 9.84 | 14.63 ± 0.61 | 4.19 | 15.06 ± 0.34 | 1.49 | 14.05 ± 0.53 | 6.33 |
20 | 20.28 ± 0.67 | 2.28 | 17.99 ± 1.28 | 10.04 | 19.34 ± 0.53 | 3.29 | 20.16 ± 0.42 | 1.02 | 17.59 ± 1.43 | 12.03 |
25 | 24.76 ± 0.83 | 3.06 | 22.51 ± 1.63 | 9.97 | 24.10 ± 0.67 | 3.88 | 25.27 ± 0.21 | 1.10 | 23.44 ± 1.31 | 6.94 |
\( \mathrm{Average}\kern0.5em {\overline{\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}}}_{\boldsymbol{r}} \) | 76.00 | 20.44 | 11.11 | 16.24 | 11.81 | |||||