 Research
 Open Access
 Published:
Digital spotlighting filtering optimization for SAR imaging
EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing volume 2019, Article number: 84 (2019)
Abstract
In this paper, a synthetic aperture radar (SAR) image formation simulator is used to objectively evaluate the parameter selection within the digital spotlighting process. Specifically, recommendations for the filter type and filter order of the lowpass filters used in the range and azimuth decimation processes within the digital spotlighting algorithm are determined to maximize image quality and minimize computational cost. Results show that a finite impulse response lowpass filter with a Taylor \((\overline {n}=5)\) window applied provides the highest image quality over a wide range of filter orders and decimation factors. Additionally, a linear relationship between filter length and decimation factor is found.
Introduction
Of the several methods for synthetic aperture radar (SAR) image formation, backprojection has many attractive attributes. A SAR image may be iteratively formed by backprojecting each pulse return independently and using a simple summation of the backprojected returns to form the SAR image. Thus, each pulse return may be processed in parallel. Additionally, the backprojection process automatically orthorectifies the image allowing for ease of geolocation of the processed imagery. However, there is a significant computational cost to backprojection. Although it is a conceptually straightforward algorithm, it carries a computational complexity of O(N^{3}) which does not scale.
A common way to combat the nonscalable nature of the backprojection algorithm is to break the SAR phase history into manageable pieces and backproject different locations of the SAR image independently. This process, called digital spotlighting [1], lends itself to further parallel processing and scalability of the backprojection algorithm.
Several methods in the literature have used digital spotlighting in SAR image formation. In [2], a new algorithm for circular SAR imaging is developed using digital spotlighting for acceleration. Additionally, in [3], digital spotlighting is used to enhance the backprojection process in terms of reduced Doppler aliasing. In [4], digital spotlighting is used to processes wide bandwidth and wide beamwidth P3 SAR data.
However, many of the methods provided in the literature do not give guidance on several of the parameters involved in the digital spotlighting process, namely filter order and filter type. The choice of filter and the length of its impulse response play a large role in the formed SAR image quality and the computational complexity of the digital spotlighting algorithm.
This paper presents a series of tests to determine filter design guidelines for digital spotlighting in the SAR image formation process. A SAR image formation simulator is used which generates synthetic SAR video phase history (VPH) from digital imagery [5, 6]. The synthetic VPH data is then formed into SAR imagery via digital spotlighting, inverse Fourier transform (iFFT) processing, and backprojection. Because the synthetic VPH is generated from digital imagery, the quality of the formed SAR imagery is able to be objectively evaluated with wellknown image processing metrics. In this study, structured similarity (SSIM) is used to provide simple guidelines on filter design in SAR digital spotlighting [7].
Test results show that a finite impulse response (FIR) filter Taylor window \((\overline {n}=5)\) provides the highest image quality over several windowing methods tested, and a simple linear relationship between the number of digitally spotlit segments D and filter order M is discovered.
Following the introduction, Section 2 provides an overview of the SAR simulator for image formation. Section 3 provides a detailed overview of the digital spotlighting algorithm. Section 4 shows the results of FIR filter window evaluation, and Section 5 provides an evaluation of the filter order. Section 6 provides some concluding remarks.
SAR processing overview
In order to objectively evaluate different parameters of the digital spotlighting processing chain, a spotlight SAR simulator is used to generate synthetic VPH from digital imagery. Then, traditional SAR processing methods are used to generate imagery from the synthetic VPH data. Because the synthetic VPH is generated from imagery, traditional image processing metrics may be used to objectively evaluate the processing methods. Figure 1 gives a block diagram of the SAR simulator process.
As shown in Fig. 1, the SAR simulator is comprised of six processing steps. The first set of processing steps in the simulator form the VPH from a digital image I[·]. This set of functions are referred to as the radar processing functions. The Calculate Range function determines the range from the beginning of the imaging patch to each pixel in the image, d[h,v,θ], where θ is the angular position of the radar with respect to the image. The Generate Return function sums up delayed and scaled linear frequency modulated (LFM) pulses to form the return SAR signal, given by:
where x_{p}(t) is the emitted radar pulse, and I_{s}[·] is the digital image I[·] scaled in magnitude.
The Demodulate, Sample, and Matched filter function is a set of standard SAR processing techniques to generate the VPH from x_{ret}(t,θ). The synthetic VPH is labeled as X_{ph}[k,θ] in Fig. 1.
The next set of functions are referred to as image processing functions. These functions take the synthetic VPH data and form SAR imagery. The first image processing function is the digital spotlighting function. This function allows segmentation of the VPH data so that different sections of the imaging scene may be formed independently. The next process is the iFFT and Oversample function which utilizes the inverse fast Fourier Transform to convert the VPH data into a range profile, R_{p}[k,θ]. The final image processing function is the backprojection function which paints the range profile over the imaging scene, provides phase error correction, and sums up each backprojected pulse return to form the SAR image.
Each of the processing functions given in Fig. 1 is developed in detail in [8], with the exception of digital spotlighting, which is detailed in Section 3.
SAR dynamic range
Generally, SAR imagery is displayed in decibels due to its large dynamic range. Typical imagery, however, has a relatively limited dynamic range. Thus, to effectively utilize imagery in creating synthetic phase history, the dynamic range of the imagery is stretched. First, we can determine the dynamic range of the radar by determining the number of bits in the A/D process.
where R_{dB} is the resolution of the A/D converter in decibels, and b is the number of bits resolved in the A/D converter. Consider we have an image I[·], where I[h,v], where h is the horizontal pixel index (column), and v is the vertical index (row). To stretch the dynamic range of imagery, we have:
where I_{s}[·] is the stretched image. If the original image, I[·], has a range of [0,1], the scaled imagery I_{s}[·] also ranges from [0,1]. However, its dynamic range is shifted to match that of the A/D converter. Figure 2 gives an example of the “San Francisco” image scaled to b=10 (i.e., R_{dB}=− 60.21).
As shown in Fig. 2, the scaled imagery is then best visualized in decibels.
Digital spotlighting method
Assume a scene with aliasfree imaging region of radius R_{0}. From that scene, a SAR image of (NG)×(NG) meters may be formed, where N is the number of row/column pixels, and G is the ground sample distance.
Both N and G are determined by:
and
where BW_{p} is the LFM pulse bandwidth, \(f_{\Delta } = \frac {1}{T_{r}}\) is the frequency step size, T_{r} is the duration of the return signal, and c is the speed of light. A depiction of the imaging region is given in Fig. 3.
One of the uses of digital spotlighting is to mitigate the computational burden of backprojection of the SAR VPH to image the scene. Since backprojection is an O(N^{3}) algorithm, it does not scale, so digital spotlighting is a way to break up the phase history into computationally manageable sections for imaging via backprojection.
Given the imaging scene in Fig. 3, the original imaging canvas is N×N pixels. Through digital spotlighting, D^{2} digitally spotlit segments are backprojected to form \(\lceil \frac {N}{D} \rceil {\times } \lceil \frac {N}{D} \rceil \) pixel images. First, the central position of each of the the digitally spotlit scenes, given by C_{i,j}, is determined. The digitally spotlit scenes are indexed by i and j row and column indices (i.e., i,j∈[0,D−1]). The center of the digitally spotlit scene (i,j) is given by:
The pixel locations are converted to distances to the center of the imaging scene (scene center), indicated by O in Fig. 3, by:
Digital spotlighting consists of four major processing steps:
Repositioning of the antenna
Recentering of the phase history data
Decimation in the range dimension
Decimation in the azimuth dimension
Repositioning of the antenna
For each pulse return of the phase history, the position of the antenna must be updated to reflect the position of the new scene center. Assume we have an antenna position of P=(X,Y,Z), where X, Y, and Z are the latitude, longitude, and altitude, respectively, of the antenna, in meters. The new antenna position is, then, given by:
where
and P_{O}=(X_{O},Y_{O},Z_{O}) is the position of scene center O. When backprojecting the digitally spotlit area, P_{C} is used for all distance calculations.
Recentering of the phase history data
Recentering of the phase history data applies a phase shift in order to place the digitally spotlit scene at zero frequency. Because the phase history is frequency dependent upon range, the differential range from the center of the spotlit scene to scene center is first calculated.
The recentered phase history is then given by:
where
X_{ph}[·] is the original phase history data of the scene, and X_{C,i,j}[·] is the recentered phase history about position C_{i,j}. f[k] are the frequency bins in range, where k∈[0,K), and K is the number of range samples in X_{ph}[·]. f_{c} is the center frequency of the radar’s LFM pulse.
Decimation in the range dimension
The recentered data is then lowpass filtered with a discrete cutoff frequency of \(\frac {\pi }{D}\) radians per sample, in which we obtain:
where F_{r}{·} is the lowpass filtering operation in the range dimension. Then, the lowpassfiltered data may be downsampled by a factor of D.
X_{rd,i,j}[·] is the phase history decimated in range for spotlit area (i,j).
Decimation in the azimuth dimension
The aliasfree azimuth resolution is used to determine the amount of decimation in the crossrange. The new azimuth step size is given by:
where ϕ is the minimum elevation angle of the radar to the spotlit scene, given by:
The decimation factor in azimuth is given by:
and the decimated phase history used in backprojection of the digitally spotlit area is given by:
F_{a}{·} is the lowpass filtering operation applied in the azimuth dimension, and X_{sp,i,j}[·] is the digitally spotlit VPH for region (i,j). The digitally spotlit phase history can then be backprojected to form a subsegment of the original imaging scene, whose center is P_{C}(i,j). The complexity of the backprojection process of X_{sp,i,j}[·] is significant reduction from the backprojection of X_{ph}[·] considering there are a factor of DL fewer samples in X_{sp,i,j}[·], and those samples are projected onto an imaging plane which has a factor of D^{2} fewer samples.
Filter window results and discussion
A number of windowing functions have been used in the literature for SAR processing. In [9], a Hamming window is used on the LPF for digital spotlighting. Additionally, subsequent articles have used Taylor windows and raised cosine windows in different SAR processing techniques [10, 11]. In the following study, six different windows are compared: rectangular, Hamming, Blackman, Taylor \((\overline {n}=5)\), raised cosine, and Kaiser (β=5). The Blackman and Kaiser windows are included due to their powerful stopband suppression capabilities, and Taylor order \((\overline {n} = 5)\) and Kaiser (β=5) parameters are set because those particular variants performed the best over a number of values tested.
In the study, four images are considered: “Stockton,” “San Francisco,” “Pentagon,” and “Washington, D.C.” All of the images can be found at [12]. Each image is a 1024×1024 color image, and they are converted to grayscale. Additionally, each image is cropped from the center to form four 512×512 grayscale images. Each of these eight images is fed into the SAR simulator with digital spotlighting enabled to test different variables of the digital spotlight processing. The converted grayscale images are given in Fig. 4.
The simulator options are as follows: We define P_{O}=(0,0,0) and P=(3696,1531,2800) m at the center of the synthetic aperture. R_{0}=707.1 m. All radar parameters, number of pulses, and azimuth step size are determined by [13].
For image quality analysis, the Structured Similarity (SSIM) metric is used [7]. For filter window analysis, each of the windows is used over a range of filter orders on each of the test images. SSIM results are collected and analyzed over a range of D∈[3,20]. The filter length is 2M+1 where M∈[5,75] is incremented in steps of 2. Results for four of the images and different decimation factors are given in Fig. 5.
In Fig. 5, two conclusions can be made. First, all windowing methods eventually result in good overall digital spotlighting performance with the exception of the rectangular window. Regardless of filter order, the rectangular window performs below that of the other windowing methods. Second, the Taylor window \((\overline {n}=5)\) performs the best of the windows tested. Although only D∈{6,8,14,18} digital spotlighting segments are shown for a few images in Fig. 5, the Taylor window outperforms the others through the entire range of D=[3,20] across all test images. We can visually see the effects of varying the type of filter window in digital spotlighting. Figure 6 gives a digitally spotlit “San Francisco” image with both rectangular and Taylor \((\overline {n}=5)\) windowing applied. A zoomed in section of Fig. 6 is provided in Fig. 7. In addition to synthetic VPH, the AFRL GOTCHA phase history from a 2006 data collect [14] is processed with the simulator to validate the digital spotlighting process. The results of digital spotlighting the GOTCHA dataset are given in Fig. 8, with a zoomed in section given in Fig. 9.
As shown in Figs. 6 and 7, when utilizing the rectangular window, aliased regions are prominent, and there are visual bordering effects at the intersection between spotlit regions. Conversely, when applying a Taylor \((\overline {n}=5)\) window, these artifacts are significantly reduced and not readily visible. Additionally, we can see the improved image quality utilizing a Taylor window over a rectangular window in the GOTCHA data, provided in Figs. 8 and 9.
Filter order results and discussion
An additional parameter for digital spotlighting is the filter order, or length of the FIR filter’s impulse response in the decimation in range and azimuth. According to Kaiser’s FIRlength approximation, the required filter order M is linearly proportional to the digital spotlighting segments D. Figure 10 shows SSIM values of the “Washington D.C.” image across several filter orders and several decimation factors and applying a Taylor \((\overline {n}=5)\) window to the filter coefficients.
In Fig. 10, it is readily shown that as the decimation factor increases, the required filter order M increases as well. Careful analysis of these curves allow us to determine the minimum value of M for each decimation factor which maximizes the SSIM value. This filter order is referred to as M_{asm}. M_{asm} is defined as the minimum value of M where the SSIM score is greater than or equal to 0.99 of the maximum SSIM score over the range of M (i.e., asymptotically close to the maximum SSIM score). Table 1 gives M_{asm} generated from all test images.
From the Kaiser FIR approximation, it is known that M_{asm} linearly increases with increasing D. A linear fit is applied to the data in Table 1 to create a simple calculation for the required filter order for digital spotlighting. Fitting the data to a line, we obtain:
where s=2.95, and b=− 4.15. Figure 11 gives a visual representation of the data in Table 1 and calculated \(\widetilde {M}_{asm}[\cdot ]\).
As shown in Fig. 11, the values for M_{asm} over a fairly wide range can be fairly well approximated with a linear fit for each of the images tested. Thus, the FIR filter order required for digital spotlighting in general may be estimated using Eq. 21.
Conclusion
This paper presents an objective evaluation of filter parameter selection for digital spotlighting in SAR imagery. The analysis is generated from a SAR image formation simulator which uses imagery to form the phase history of the radar. Because of this, the quality of the reconstructed SAR image may be objectively evaluated using wellknown image processing metrics. From the analysis, it is shown that the Taylor window \((\overline {n}=5)\) provides the best image quality over a wide range of filter lengths and decimation factors. Additionally a simple linear relationship between the decimation factor and filter order is found.
Abbreviations
 FIR:

Finite impulse response
 iFFT:

Inverse Fourier transform
 LFM:

Linear frequency modulated
 SAR:

Synthetic aperture radar
 VPH:

Video phase history
References
 1
M. Soumekh, in Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Image Processing, vol. 1. Digital spotlighting and coherent subaperture image formation for stripmap synthetic aperture radar (IEEE, 1994), pp. 476–480.
 2
A. Dallinger, S. Schelkshorn, J. Detlefsen, Efficient ωkalgorithm for circular SAR and cylindrical reconstruction areas. Adv. Radio Sci. 4.B. 3:, 85–91 (2006).
 3
L. Nguyen, et al., Enhancement of backprojection SAR imagery using digital spotlighting preprocessing (IEEE, 2004).
 4
M. Soumekh, et al., Signal processing of wide bandwidth and wide beamwidth P3 SAR data. IEEE Trans. Aerospace Electr. Syst.37(4), 1122–1141 (2001).
 5
E. J. Balster, F. A. Scarpino, A. M. Kordik, K. L. Hill, Synthetic aperture radar imaging simulator for pulse envelope evaluation. J. Appl. Remote Sensing. 11(4), 046022 (2017).
 6
E. J. Balster, et al., in Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on OpenCL. Gpgpu acceleration using opencl for a spotlight sar simulator. (ACM, 2017), p. 1.
 7
Z. Wang, et al., Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans. Image Process.13(4), 600–612 (2004).
 8
E. J. Balster, F. A. Scarpino, A. M. Kordik, K. L. Hill, Synthetic aperture radar imaging simulator for pulse envelope evaluation. J. Appl. Remote Sensing. 11(4), 046022 (2017).
 9
K. E. Dungan, L. A. Gorham, L. J. Moore, in Algorithms for Synthetic Aperture Radar Imagery XX. Vol. 8746. SAR digital spotlight implementation in MATLAB (International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2013).
 10
A. W. Doerry, Anatomy of a SAR impulse response. No. SAND20075042 (Sandia National Laboratories, 2007).
 11
C. V. J. Jakowatz, et al., SpotlightMode Synthetic Aperture Radar: A Signal Processing Approach (Springer Science & Business Media, 2012).
 12
USC Signal and Image Processing Institute. http://sipi.usc.edu/database. Accessed 31 July 2019.
 13
L. A. Gorham, L. J. Moore, in Algorithms for Synthetic Aperture Radar Imagery XVII. Vol. 7699. SAR image formation toolbox for MATLAB (International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2010).
 14
GOTCHA 2008 Dataset. https://www.sdms.afrl.af.mil/index.php?collection=gotcha. Accessed 31 July 2019.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the US Air Force Research Laboratory for funding this effort.
Funding
Funding of this work was provided by the US Air Force Research Laboratory, Sensors Directorate.
Author information
Affiliations
Contributions
The authors’ contributions to digital spotlighting processing are as follows: We have created a SAR simulator which can objectively evaluate different parameter selection of the digital spotlighting process, namely filter order and filter type used in the decimation of the VPH. We have additionally found a simple linear relationship between appropriate filter order and decimation factor. SAR processing developers can use this relationship to easily calculate the proper filter order to use for digital spotlighting. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Eric J. Balster.
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Balster, E.J., Mundy, D.B., Kordik, A.M. et al. Digital spotlighting filtering optimization for SAR imaging. J Image Video Proc. 2019, 84 (2019) doi:10.1186/s1364001904810
Received
Accepted
Published
DOI
Keywords
 Spotlight SAR simulator
 Digital spotlighting
 Filter order
 Filter windowing