Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Book 1

    Uploaded by

    kannanmail4u
    11 views2 pages
    The document compares different shrinkage methods for their effect on PSNR values of input and output images. MET and SURE shrinkage modestly improved the PSNR from 20.67 to 23.21-23.61, while hard and Bayes shrinkage provided larger gains to 24.08-24.74 PSNR.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Book1

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document compares different shrinkage methods for their effect on PSNR values of input and output images. MET and SURE shrinkage modestly improved the PSNR from 20.67 to 23.21-23.61, while hard and Bayes shrinkage provided larger gains to 24.08-24.74 PSNR.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    11 views2 pages

    Book 1

    Uploaded by

    kannanmail4u
    The document compares different shrinkage methods for their effect on PSNR values of input and output images. MET and SURE shrinkage modestly improved the PSNR from 20.67 to 23.21-23.61, while hard and Bayes shrinkage provided larger gains to 24.08-24.74 PSNR.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    MET PSNR PSNR HOD OF OF INPU OUT T PUT Visus 20.67 23.61 hrink Soft Visus 20.67 24.

    74 hrink Hard SURE 20.67 23.21 shrink Bayes 20.67 24.08 Shrin k

    25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18

    PSNR OF INPUT PSNR OF OUTPUT

    You might also like