Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
129 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
28 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

UNSURE: Unknown Noise level Stein's Unbiased Risk Estimator (2409.01985v2)

Published 3 Sep 2024 in stat.ML, cs.LG, and eess.SP

Abstract: Recently, many self-supervised learning methods for image reconstruction have been proposed that can learn from noisy data alone, bypassing the need for ground-truth references. Most existing methods cluster around two classes: i) Noise2Self and similar cross-validation methods that require very mild knowledge about the noise distribution, and ii) Stein's Unbiased Risk Estimator (SURE) and similar approaches that assume full knowledge of the distribution. The first class of methods is often suboptimal compared to supervised learning, and the second class tends to be impractical, as the noise level is often unknown in real-world applications. In this paper, we provide a theoretical framework that characterizes this expressivity-robustness trade-off and propose a new approach based on SURE, but unlike the standard SURE, does not require knowledge about the noise level. Throughout a series of experiments, we show that the proposed estimator outperforms other existing self-supervised methods on various imaging inverse problems

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (46)
  1. ENSURE: A General Approach for Unsupervised Training of Deep Image Reconstruction Algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 42(4):1133–1144, April 2023. ISSN 0278-0062, 1558-254X. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2022.3224359. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.10631. arXiv:2010.10631 [cs, eess, stat].
  2. Blind Deconvolution Using Convex Programming. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 60(3):1711–1732, March 2014. ISSN 0018-9448, 1557-9654. doi: 10.1109/TIT.2013.2294644. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6680763/.
  3. Mariana S. C. Almeida and Mário A. T. Figueiredo. Parameter Estimation for Blind and Non-Blind Deblurring Using Residual Whiteness Measures. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 22(7):2751–2763, July 2013. ISSN 1941-0042. doi: 10.1109/TIP.2013.2257810. URL https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6497608. Conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.
  4. Shun-ichi Amari. Information Geometry and Its Applications, volume 194 of Applied Mathematical Sciences. Springer Japan, Tokyo, 2016. ISBN 978-4-431-55977-1 978-4-431-55978-8. doi: 10.1007/978-4-431-55978-8. URL https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-4-431-55978-8.
  5. Noise2Self: Blind Denoising by Self-Supervision, June 2019. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1901.11365. arXiv:1901.11365 [cs, stat].
  6. Whiteness-based parameter selection for Poisson data in variational image processing. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 117:197–218, May 2023. ISSN 0307-904X. doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2022.12.018. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0307904X22005972.
  7. The Perception-Distortion Tradeoff. In 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp.  6228–6237, June 2018. doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2018.00652. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1711.06077. arXiv:1711.06077 [cs].
  8. AmbientGAN: Generative Models From Lossy Measurements. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2018.
  9. Computational and statistical tradeoffs via convex relaxation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(13):E1181–E1190, March 2013. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1302293110. URL https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1302293110. Publisher: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
  10. Equivariant Imaging: Learning Beyond the Range Space. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp.  4379–4388, 2021. URL https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/ICCV2021/html/Chen_Equivariant_Imaging_Learning_Beyond_the_Range_Space_ICCV_2021_paper.html.
  11. Robust Equivariant Imaging: A Fully Unsupervised Framework for Learning To Image From Noisy and Partial Measurements. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp.  5647–5656, 2022. URL https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/CVPR2022/html/Chen_Robust_Equivariant_Imaging_A_Fully_Unsupervised_Framework_for_Learning_To_CVPR_2022_paper.html.
  12. Ambient Diffusion: Learning Clean Distributions from Corrupted Data. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, February 2024. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2023/hash/012af729c5d14d279581fc8a5db975a1-Abstract-Conference.html.
  13. Message-passing algorithms for compressed sensing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(45):18914–18919, November 2009. ISSN 0027-8424, 1091-6490. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0909892106. URL https://pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.0909892106.
  14. Bradley Efron. The Estimation of Prediction Error: Covariance Penalties and Cross-Validation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 99(467):619–632, September 2004. ISSN 0162-1459, 1537-274X. doi: 10.1198/016214504000000692. URL http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1198/016214504000000692.
  15. Y.C. Eldar. Generalized SURE for Exponential Families: Applications to Regularization. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 57(2):471–481, February 2009. ISSN 1053-587X, 1941-0476. doi: 10.1109/TSP.2008.2008212. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4663926/.
  16. Rémi Gribonval. Should Penalized Least Squares Regression be Interpreted as Maximum A Posteriori Estimation? IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 59(5):2405–2410, May 2011. ISSN 1053-587X, 1941-0476. doi: 10.1109/TSP.2011.2107908. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5699941/.
  17. Noise2Inverse: Self-supervised deep convolutional denoising for tomography. IEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging, 6:1320–1335, 2020. ISSN 2333-9403, 2334-0118, 2573-0436. doi: 10.1109/TCI.2020.3019647. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2001.11801. arXiv:2001.11801 [cs, eess, stat].
  18. Neighbor2Neighbor: Self-Supervised Denoising from Single Noisy Images. In 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp.  14776–14785, Nashville, TN, USA, June 2021. IEEE. ISBN 978-1-66544-509-2. doi: 10.1109/CVPR46437.2021.01454. URL https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9577596/.
  19. H. M. Hudson. A Natural Identity for Exponential Families with Applications in Multiparameter Estimation. The Annals of Statistics, 6(3):473–484, 1978. ISSN 0090-5364. URL https://www.jstor.org/stable/2958553. Publisher: Institute of Mathematical Statistics.
  20. Noise2Score: Tweedie’s Approach to Self-Supervised Image Denoising without Clean Images. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2021.
  21. Noise distribution adaptive self-supervised image denoising using tweedie distribution and score matching. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp.  2008–2016, 2022. URL http://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/CVPR2022/html/Kim_Noise_Distribution_Adaptive_Self-Supervised_Image_Denoising_Using_Tweedie_Distribution_and_CVPR_2022_paper.html.
  22. Noise2Void - Learning Denoising From Single Noisy Images. In 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp.  2124–2132, Long Beach, CA, USA, June 2019. IEEE. ISBN 978-1-72813-293-8. doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2019.00223. URL https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8954066/.
  23. High-Quality Self-Supervised Deep Image Denoising. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2019, 2019.
  24. An Unbiased Risk Estimator for Image Denoising in the Presence of Mixed Poisson–Gaussian Noise. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 23(3):1255–1268, March 2014. ISSN 1057-7149, 1941-0042. doi: 10.1109/TIP.2014.2300821. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6714502/.
  25. Noise2Noise: Learning Image Restoration without Clean Data, October 2018. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1803.04189. arXiv:1803.04189 [cs, stat].
  26. Identifiability and Stability in Blind Deconvolution Under Minimal Assumptions. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 63(7):4619–4633, July 2017. ISSN 0018-9448, 1557-9654. doi: 10.1109/TIT.2017.2689779. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7890476/.
  27. AR-DAE: Towards Unbiased Neural Entropy Gradient Estimation, June 2020. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.05164. arXiv:2006.05164 [cs, stat].
  28. Junjie Ma and Li Ping. Orthogonal AMP, January 2017. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.06509. arXiv:1602.06509 [cs, math].
  29. C. L. Mallows. Some Comments on CP. Technometrics, 15(4):661–675, 1973. ISSN 0040-1706. doi: 10.2307/1267380. URL https://www.jstor.org/stable/1267380. Publisher: [Taylor & Francis, Ltd., American Statistical Association, American Society for Quality].
  30. Unsupervised Learning with Stein’s Unbiased Risk Estimator, July 2020. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1805.10531. arXiv:1805.10531 [cs, stat].
  31. Noisier2Noise: Learning to Denoise From Unpaired Noisy Data. In 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp.  12061–12069, Seattle, WA, USA, June 2020. IEEE. ISBN 978-1-72817-168-5. doi: 10.1109/CVPR42600.2020.01208. URL https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9156650/.
  32. Unbiased Risk Estimation in the Normal Means Problem via Coupled Bootstrap Techniques, October 2022. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2111.09447. arXiv:2111.09447 [math, stat].
  33. Deep Learning Techniques for Inverse Problems in Imaging. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Information Theory, 1(1):39–56, May 2020. ISSN 2641-8770. doi: 10.1109/JSAIT.2020.2991563. URL https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9084378/.
  34. Recorrupted-to-Recorrupted: Unsupervised Deep Learning for Image Denoising. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp.  2043–2052, 2021. URL https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/CVPR2021/html/Pang_Recorrupted-to-Recorrupted_Unsupervised_Deep_Learning_for_Image_Denoising_CVPR_2021_paper.html.
  35. Monte-Carlo Sure: A Black-Box Optimization of Regularization Parameters for General Denoising Algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 17(9):1540–1554, September 2008. ISSN 1057-7149. doi: 10.1109/TIP.2008.2001404. URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4598837/.
  36. Least Squares Estimation Without Priors or Supervision. Neural Computation, 23(2):374–420, February 2011. ISSN 0899-7667, 1530-888X. doi: 10.1162/NECO˙a˙00076. URL https://direct.mit.edu/neco/article/23/2/374-420/7627.
  37. Whiteness-based bilevel learning of regularization parameters in imaging, March 2024. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.07026. arXiv:2403.07026 [cs, eess, math].
  38. Divergence Estimation in Message Passing algorithms, May 2021. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2105.07086. arXiv:2105.07086 [cs, math].
  39. Charles M. Stein. Estimation of the Mean of a Multivariate Normal Distribution. The Annals of Statistics, 9(6):1135–1151, 1981. ISSN 0090-5364. URL https://www.jstor.org/stable/2240405. Publisher: Institute of Mathematical Statistics.
  40. Sensing Theorems for Unsupervised Learning in Linear Inverse Problems. Journal of Machine Learning Research (JMLR), 2023a.
  41. DeepInverse: A deep learning framework for inverse problems in imaging, June 2023b. URL https://github.com/deepinv/deepinv.
  42. Unsupervised Learning From Incomplete Measurements for Inverse Problems. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:4983–4995, December 2022. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2022/hash/203e651b448deba5de5f45430c45ea04-Abstract-Conference.html.
  43. D-OAMP: A Denoising-based Signal Recovery Algorithm for Compressed Sensing, October 2016. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1610.05991. arXiv:1610.05991 [cs, math].
  44. Self-Supervised Physics-Based Deep Learning MRI Reconstruction Without Fully-Sampled Data. In 2020 IEEE 17th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI), pp.  921–925, April 2020. doi: 10.1109/ISBI45749.2020.9098514. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1910.09116. arXiv:1910.09116 [physics].
  45. Beyond a Gaussian Denoiser: Residual Learning of Deep CNN for Image Denoising. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 26(7):3142–3155, July 2017. ISSN 1057-7149, 1941-0042. doi: 10.1109/TIP.2017.2662206. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.03981. arXiv:1608.03981 [cs].
  46. Extending Stein’ s unbiased risk estimator to train deep denoisers with correlated pairs of noisy images. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 32. Curran Associates, Inc., 2019. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2019/hash/4d5b995358e7798bc7e9d9db83c612a5-Abstract.html.

Summary

  • The paper introduces UNSURE, a novel self-supervised approach that reconstructs images without prior noise level knowledge by relaxing the strict divergence constraint.
  • The paper derives closed-form solutions under various noise distributions, achieving near-MMSE performance and outperforming traditional cross-validation methods.
  • The paper validates UNSURE on tasks like MRI reconstruction, demonstrating its practical ability to balance robustness and expressivity in real-world imaging scenarios.

UNSURE: Unknown Noise Level Stein's Unbiased Risk Estimator

The paper “UNSURE: Unknown Noise Level Stein's Unbiased Risk Estimator,” authored by Juli an Tachella, Mike Davies, and Laurent Jacques, proposes a novel approach to self-supervised learning for image reconstruction when the noise distribution is unknown. This method, termed UNSURE, stands as a significant contribution to addressing the inherent trade-offs between robustness and expressivity in image denoising algorithms.

Introduction and Context

Image reconstruction methods have achieved notable success in recent applications, most prominently in medical imaging and computational photography. Traditional supervised learning paradigms demand ground-truth data for training, which is often impractical in these domains due to the high cost or inaccessibility of clean, noise-free images. This limitation has given rise to self-supervised approaches that only necessitate noisy data for training.

Existing self-supervised methods can be broadly categorized into two classes:

  1. Methods such as Noise2Self and other cross-validation techniques that operate under minimal assumptions regarding the noise distribution.
  2. Approaches based on Stein's Unbiased Risk Estimator (SURE), assuming comprehensive knowledge of the noise distribution.

The former category, while robust, often yields suboptimal performance compared to supervised techniques. The latter, although potentially more accurate, is impractical due to the common absence of precise knowledge about the noise level in real-world applications.

The UNSURE Framework

The authors introduce a theoretical framework to elucidate the robustness-expressivity trade-off inherent in these methods. They pinpoint that methods relying on full noise distribution information (like SURE) are highly expressive but less robust against noise misestimation. In contrast, cross-validation methods, which impose stricter constraints on estimator derivatives, are robust but less expressive.

UNSURE is proposed as a compromise, aiming to strike a balance by not requiring noise level knowledge yet maintaining a higher level of expressivity than cross-validation approaches. The key insight is constraining the divergence of the estimator to zero in expectation rather than strictly zero. Mathematically, this translates to optimizing the following objective:

fDF=arg minfSDFEyf(y)y2f^{\text{DF}} = \argmin_{f \in \mathcal{S}_{\text{DF}}} \mathbb{E}_{y} \|f(y) - y\|^2

where

SDF={fL:Eydivf(y)=0}\mathcal{S}_{\text{DF}} = \{ f \in L : \mathbb{E}_{y} \,\text{div} f(y) = 0 \}

This approach effectively relaxes the zero-derivative constraint of cross-validation methods, thereby enhancing expressivity.

Analytical and Experimental Validation

The theoretical underpinnings of UNSURE are detailed rigorously. The authors derive closed-form solutions under various noise settings, including Gaussian, Poisson-Gaussian, and spatially correlated noise, emphasizing the generality and adaptability of their framework.

Key results derived include:

  • The expected mean squared error (MSE) under optimal divergence-free denoisers, demonstrating the close-to-MMSE performance

Ex,yf(y)x2=σ2(11MMSEσ21)\mathbb{E}_{x,y} \| {f(y) - x }^2 = \sigma^2 \left(\frac{1}{1 - \frac{\text{MMSE}}{\sigma^2}} - 1\right)

  • New insights into noise estimation where optimal divergence-free estimators offer a conservative yet effective measure of noise level.

The empirical validation comprises various image denoising and reconstruction tasks. Key findings include:

  • UNSURE consistently outperforms traditional cross-validation methods and is on par with SURE where noise distribution details are known.
  • In practical applications like MRI reconstruction and computed tomography, UNSURE exhibits robust performance under unknown noise levels, validating its theoretical claims.

Implications and Future Directions

The implications of UNSURE are manifold:

  • In practice, it alleviates the need for noise level estimation, a common hurdle in applying SURE-based methods.
  • Theoretically, it provides a structured way to balance robustness and expressivity, contributing to the broader understanding of self-supervised learning methodologies.
  • The adaptability to various noise distributions widens its applicability across different imaging scenarios beyond the conventional Gaussian noise settings.

Future research can build on this framework to explore adaptive techniques that could self-tune the divergence constraint parameters in more complex noise scenarios. Additionally, extending UNSURE to handle more perceptually relevant losses could bridge the gap between mathematical optimality and perceptual quality in image reconstruction tasks.

Conclusion

The UNSURE methodology innovatively extends the utility of Stein’s Unbiased Risk Estimator to scenarios with unknown noise levels, maintaining robustness while enhancing expressivity over existing cross-validation methods. This work marks a significant step forward in self-supervised learning for image reconstruction, promising improved practical performance across a spectrum of real-world applications.