A comparative Study on MMSE Approaches to
Speckle Noise Reduction in SAR Images
Soumaya Fatnassi Mohamed Yahya
National Engineering School of Gabes National Engineering School of Gabes
MACS Lab MACS Lab
Gabes, Tunisia Gabes, Tunisia
soumayafatnassi@yahoo.fr mohamed_yahia1@yahoo.fr
Abstract— Speckle noise in the satellite image degrades
image quality and makes it less informative about the
target/features in the image under study. Denoising SAR image
is a good challenge for various researchers because the
classification or recognition becomes difficult on image affected
by speckle noise. Thus it is of prior importance to reduce the
speckle in the image before applying any image processing
technique. So far many filtering techniques have been
developed for denoising SAR images. The prime aim of
denoising is to eliminate speckle noise by retaining the
important feature of the images. In this paper, we will discuss
the MMSE-based filter and his improved versions. In fact,
many researches was made to prove the effectiveness of this
based filter and their alternative versions for that the author
made a brief analysis of different techniques used for speckle
noise reduction, along with their advantages and
disadvantages, in a comparative manner. The evaluation of
each filter is based on its capacity to smooth the homogeneous
areas, its aptitude to preserve contours, and its capacity to
preserve spatial detail. Airborne (Les Landes, France acquired
by NASA JBL) synthetic aperture radar SAR data is used for
validation.
Keywords— MMSE filter; Speckle noise; IMMSE filter; SAR;
Filtering approaches
I. INTRODUCTION
The synthetic aperture radar (SAR) plays an important
role in the analysis and characterization of the Earth’s
surface [1]. Unfortunately, due to the coherent record of
echoes, SAR data are affected by multiplicative and additive
noise which degrades the radiometric quality of the image
and reduces the performances of information extraction
techniques. However, the image is mostly affected by
multiplicative noise compared to additive noise. This
multiplicative noise is also known as speckle noise. For
these reasons, it should be filtered correctly.
Several techniques are used to remove the speckle noises
with their strength and limitation. The NLook processing
method is used to smooth the speckle image by nature of
non-coherent but the result present a low resolution [2].
Another method is proposed on frequency domain,
wavelet transform [3] are used to remove the speckle noise.
By this method high frequency components are separated by
threshold and have proper decomposition levels to avoid
blurring.
Non-local means (NL) is one of the patch-based
methods. In this technique, the pixel selection for filtering
can be outstretched to global neighborhood instead of
restricting the local filtering window [4].
XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X/XX/$XX.00 ©20XX IEEE
The adaptive filters, based on the statistical behavior of
SAR images, such as Lee filter [5], Frost [6] filter and Kuan
filter [7] provide better response and make a compromise
between the smoothing effect and spatial detail preservation.
The minimum mean square error based filters that
account for the local statistics of the image have been
applied in SAR speckle filtering. Many enhanced version
have been proposed in the literature and they have been
implemented in GIS and remote sensing software due to
their effectiveness in speckle reduction, simplicity and low
computational demand.
In this paper we will discuss the improvement of these
filters and their efficiency in term of noise reduction and
spatial detail preservation. The evaluation of filter
performance includes several criteria such as, preservation
of the mean, reduction of the standard deviation,
preservation of the edges and spatial detail preservation.
And the main objective of the work presented is to perform
an analysis and a comparison filters in SAR data and to
show the robustness of the MMSE approach for filtering in
SAR image.
This paper is organized as follows: In section II, we
introduce the MMSE technique and his improved version.
Section III presents results obtained using simulated and real
SAR images. Finally, section IV gives the conclusions of
this paper.
II. SPECKLE FILTERING METHOD
Speckle noise in SAR images degrades their quality and
makes difficulties in detection and classification. Speckle
must be eliminated as pre-processing SAR images. Filtering
is a technique to remove unwanted information from an
image, to make it more appropriate for the next step of the
image-processing [8]. The main objective of Speckle
filtering is removing noise in the uniform area, preserve
texture and enhance the edge without changing features, and
provide a good visual appearance. Speckle filtering works
by moving a window over the image one pixel at a time
until it fills the entire image. The window moves and applies
a mathematical calculation and also substitutes the value of
the window central pixel. As results in the smoothing effect
and visual appearance reduced speckle is achieved [9].
There are so many methods to remove or reduce the
speckle noise. Certain filtering techniques give its best in
smoothing by removing the high frequency noises and some
are better in visual interpretation and noise reduction.
In this paper, the studied filters are applied in a
homogeneous and heterogeneous area in SAR images, aims
to measure the robustness of the MMSE algorithm for
 Many enhanced version have been proposed in the
literature and they have been implemented in GIS and
remote sensing software due to their effectiveness in speckle
reduction, simplicity and low computational demand.
In the rest of this paper, we will discuss those versions
and their efficiency in term of noise reduction and spatial
detail preservation.

a) b) C. Iterative MMSE Filter

The principle of the iterative MMSE [13-14] filter is to
build an iterative filtering procedure having a structure as
follow:
xˆ0  y , (5)
xˆk 1  xˆk  b '
k  y  xˆk  , (6)

Where
var( x k )
bk  2
(7)
(1   ) var( xk )  x k v2
2
v
The main idea of the algorithm, which demonstrates in
previous paper [10-11], is:
i. Compute the mean image by the boxcar filter using
c) a window w
ii. Compute the variance image
Fig. 1. a)Simulated H zone b) Heterogeneous T zone c) The airborne SAR
image of the Les Landes, France acquired by NASA JBL
iii. Update the filtered pixel using bk in (7)
iv. Repeat ii and iii N times
speckle noise reduction and texture preservation, essentially
in heterogeneous areas. The results of these comparative This filter guarantees a good speckle removing level but
studies later will know the best combination of filter, which with some deficiencies such as blurred edges and depressed
will be used for further work. strong reflected target. So, another version MMSE filter was
proposed to overcome this weakness.
All filters studied in this paper have a common point
which is the parameter b. The parameter b controlled the
performance of the filtering procedure. Hence, this D. Hybrid NL-IMMSE Filter
parameter should ensure high speckle reduction level and In order to improve the performance of the IMMSE
should verify the following properties: filter, the non-local principle is introduced in the calculation
of the filter parameter [15]. This filter was a perfect
(1) 0  bk'  1 , combination of the Nonlocal means filter (NLM) and the
(2) bk'  0 in homogeneous areas, IMMSE filter. This proposed filter performs despeckling
(3) bk'  1 in heterogeneous areas. based on hybrid patch similarity. The word ‘hybrid’ is used
here since the working principle of NLM depends on the
B. MMSE Filter structural similarity within the patch while that of IMMSE
depends on homogeneity similarity within the patch. So here
The minimum mean square error based filters that since the proposed filter is formed by combining both the
account for the local statistics of the image have been filters, it achieves a perfect balance between speckle
applied in SAR speckle filtering. In the MMSE filter, the removing and spatial detail preservation.
intensity pixel y of a SAR image is affected by a
multiplicative noise as [12] The hybrid NL-IMMSE filter [15], that describe in
previous study, evaluates as follows
y (i )  x(i )  v(i ) (1)
Compute x0  y by the NL mean filter. x0  y
ˆ ˆ
x is the noise free pixel and ν be the speckle noise with i.
 . The MMSE estimate should ensure high speckle reduction level.
unit mean and standard deviation var  xˆ0 
x̂ of the filtered pixel as [11-12], ii. Compute the variance image using the
'
half of the most similar non local patch. Then, compute bk
xˆ  y  b  y  y  , (2)
Where

 

b'k   var( xˆk )  1   v2  var( xˆk ) var( y)  y  v2  
2 
 
where
b  var( x) var( y) (3)
iii. Update the filtered pixel using
and xˆk 1  xˆk  bk'  y  xˆk  ,

var( x)  var( y )  y 2 v2  1    .
2
v (4) iv. Repeat ii and iii N times.
In equations (2)-(4), the mean y and the variance var(y) This filter outperformed the IMMSE filters in terms of
are estimated locally using a square window W. speckle reduction and special detail preservation.
 a) b) c) d)
Fig. 2. Filtered H zone a) Original, b) IMMSE (Wp=Ws=11*11, N=4), c) NL-IMMSE (Wp=5*5, Ws=11*11, N=4), d) Enhanced IMMSE (N=3)

a) b) c) d)
Fig. 3. Filtered T zone a) Original, b) IMMSE (Wp=Ws=11*11, N=4), c) NL-IMMSE (Wp=5*5, Ws=11*11, N=4), d) Enhanced IMMSE (N=1)

a) b) c) d)
Fig. 4. Filtered AiSAR image a) Original, b) IMMSE (Wp=Ws=11*11, N=4), c) NL-IMMSE (Wp=5*5, Ws=11*11, N=4), d) Enhanced IMMSE (N=3)

E. Improved Iterative MMSE Filter III. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Another version of iterative MMSE filter was made. The
improved iterative MMSE filter [13]come to enhance the A. Evaluation Criteria
performance of the IMMSE where the improvement In addition to visual inspections, quantitative parameters
consisted in the choice of initially filtered image, the have been used to evaluate the performance of the studied
parameter optimizing and the estimation of the local filters. The Equivalent Number of Looks (ENL) measures
statistics. the degree of speckle reduction.
This version of MMSE filter chooses to improve first the (8)
( x (i )) 2
value of the key parameters b witch always controls the ENL (i ) 
var( x (i ))
performance of the filtering process and second the choice
of initial filter which was the NLM filter to provide better Mean Square Error (MSE) is used to compare the
results and it depend also of the estimation of the local original and despeckled image. It is defined by difference
statistics. The number of iterations also was an important between the mean square values of original image to filtered
input parameter. This parameters defined by the user to image. The mean square error (MSE) is used to estimate
control the smoothness degree. Low number of iterations spatial detail preservation on simulated data.
promotes high-level speckle reduction, whereas a high M
1
number of iterations promote high spatial detail
preservation. By varying the number of iterations, the user
MSE (i ) 
M
 ( x(i)  x(i))
t 1
2 (9)

could choose the best compromise between speckle The Edge Preservation Degree based on the Ratio of
reduction and spatial detail preservation depending on the
Averages (EPD-ROA) [3] is considered to estimate spatial
scene variability of the original image.
detail preservation on real SAR images. The EPD-ROA in
This filter prove his efficiency in term of speckle horizontal direction defined by:
reduction and spatial detail preservation but it need further
 x ( m , n )/ x ( m , n 1)
improvements to affine local statistics estimation and to m,n
better estimate the value of parameters b. EPD  ROAH ( i )  (10)
 y ( m , n )/ y ( m , n 1)
m,n
 TABLE I. PERFORMANCE OF THE SYUDIED FILTERS USING Fig. 3 shows the filtered image obtained by the studied
SIMULATED D ATA
filters. The IMMSE’s filter gave high speckle reduction level
ENL MSE but spatial details are considerably smoothed. The NL-
IMMSE filter enhanced spatial details. The Improved
Improved Iterative MMSE Filter
(N=3)
98 0.16 Iterative IMMSE filter gave the best compromise between
speckle reduction and spatial detail preservation. These
Hybrid NL-IMMSE Filter(Wp=5*5; 93.89 1.07 102 outcomes can be retrieved in table 2 where the higher EPD-
Ws=11*11; N=4) ROA and ENL are produced by the enhanced iterative
IMMSE(Wp=Ws=11*11; N=4) 69.95 5.909 103 MMSE filter

TABLE II. PERFORMANCE OF THE SYUDIED FILTERS USING REAL CONCLUSION

DATA
In this paper, a comparative study of MMSE-based filter
ENL EPD-ROAh EPD-ROAv and his improved versions was made. The performance of
this improved filter depended essentially on the choice of
Improved Iterative MMSE 50.34 0.8546 0.8632 the initial filter, the choice of the parameter, and the precise
Filter (N=2) estimation of the local statistics. In addition, this MMSE-
45.12 0.8252 0.8302
Hybrid NL-IMMSE
based filter is not an independent filter since its
Filter(Wp=5*5; Ws=11*11; performances depended on the choice of the initial filter.
N=4) From the comparison result, it has been verified that the
IMMSE(Wp=13*13; W s=7*7; 24.05 0.53 0.53 improved iterative filter has the robustness in the reduction
N=4) of speckle noise in SAR images.

Where m and n are the xy coordinates of the pixel in the REFERENCES

selected zone, respectively. EPD-ROAV is obtained by
substituting in (10) the indexes (m, n + 1) by (m + 1, n). For
the original image, EPD-ROA = 1. When the EPD-ROA is
closer to one, it means better ability of spatial detail
preservation.
B. Results and Discussion
This section describes the performance comparison of
different type of filters for speckle noise reduction in SAR
image. De-noising the image using different filter and their
performance comparison are carried out. All filters are
applied into simulated and real images as shown in figure 2-
4.
In this comparison, two aspects were considering. First,
the ability of those filters to reduce speckle noise second,
their ability to maintain the spatial detail. Comparison of
the performance of filter to reduce speckle noise was
represented by ENL and MSE parameters. The higher value
of ENL means best image quality. While the lower value
MSE means that the image quality is better. To illustrate the
algorithm ability in spatial detail preserving, the authors
used the edge preservation degree based on the ratio of
averages (EPD-ROA).
C. Comparison Using Simulated Data
Fig. 2 and 3 displays the performances of the studied
filters on the simulated data. It can be seen that the original
IMMSE filter provided good speckle reduction, but it
degraded spatial details. On the other hand, the NL-IMMSE
filter gave high speckle reduction level while degrading
spatial details. The improved IMMSE provided a better
balance between speckle reduction and detail preservation.
These results are recorded quantitatively in Table 1 from
which we can observe that the improved IMMSE filter
outperformed the others filters in terms of speckle reduction
and spatial detail preservation.
D. Comparison Using Real Data
To confirm the performance of the studied filters, we
applied it to AirSAR data.
[1] A. Moreira, P. Prats-Iraola, M. Younis, G. Krieger, I.Hajnsek, and K.
P. Papathanassiou,“A tutorial on synthetic aperture radar,” IEEE
Geosci. Remote Sens. Mag.,vol. 1, no. 1,pp. 6–43, Mar. 2013.
[2] Goodman, J. W. (1976). Some fundamental properties of speckle. J.
Opt. Soc. Am, 66(11):1145-1150
[3] H. Feng, B. Hou, and M. Gong, “SAR image despeckling based on
local homogeneous-region segmentation by using pixel-relativity
measurement,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 49,
[4] F. Argenti, and L. Alparone, “Speckle removal from SAR images in
the undecimated wavelet domain,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote
Sens., vol.40, no. 11, pp. 2363–2374, Nov. 2002.
[5] J. S. Lee, “Digital image smoothing and the sigma filter,” Comput.
Vis. Graph. Image Process., vol. 24, no. 2, pp.255–269, Nov. 1983.
[6] V. S. Frost, J. A. Stiles, K. S. Shanmugan, and J. C. Holtzman, “A
model for radar image and its application to adaptive digital filtering
for multiplicative noise”, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol.
l.PMAI-4, pp.175-186,1982.
[7] D. T. Kuan, A. A. Sawchuk, T. C. Strand, and P. Chavel, “Adaptive
noise filtering for images with signal dependent noise,” IEEE Trans.
Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol.PAMI-7, no. 2, pp. 165–177, Mar.
1985.
[8] A. Maity, A. Pattanaik, S. Sagnika, and S. Pani, “A Comparative
Study on Approaches to Speckle Noise Reduction in Images,” in 2015
International Conference on Computational Intelligence and
Networks, 2015, pp. 148– 155.
[9] S. Wu, Q. Zhu, and Y. Xie, “Evaluation of various speckle reduction
filters on medical ultrasound images.,” in Engineering in Medicine
and Biology Society (EMBC), 2013 35th Annual International
Conference of the IEEE, 2013, pp. 1148–1151.
[10] C. Oliver, and S. Quegan, “Understanding syntheticaperture radar
Images,” Boston, MA: Artech House, 1998.
[11] M. Yahia,T. Hamrouni, and R. Abdelfatah, " Infinite Number of
LooksPrediction in SAR Filtering by Linear Regression , " IEEE
Geosci.Remote Sens. Letters, vol. 14, no. 12, pp. 2205 – 2209, Dec.
2017.
[12] J. S. Lee et al., “Improved sigma filter for speckle filtering of SAR
imagery,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 202–
213, Jan. 2009.
[13] M. Yahia, T. Hamrouni, and R. Abdelfattah “SAR speckle denoising
using iterative filter,” International Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Symposium IGARSS, pp.1756-1760, 2017.
[14] T. Hamrouni, M. Yahia, and R. Abdelfattah “PolSAR speckle
filtering using iterative MMSE,” International Geoscience and
Remote SensingSymposium IGARSS, pp.637-640, 2018.
[15] S. Fatnasssi, M. Yahia, and R. Abdelfattah, “SAR speckle filtering
using hybrid non local and iterative MMSE filters,” in Proc. Int.
Geosci. Remote Sens. Symp., 2019, pp. 1781–1784.
[16] M. Yahia, T.Ali, M.M.Mortula, R. Abdelfattah, S. El Mahdy, and
N. S. Arampola “IEEE Journal Of Selected Topics In Applied Earth
Observations And Remote Sensing, vol. 13, 2020, pp859-871
[17] R. Grimson, N. S. Morandeira, and Frery, C. Alejandro, “Comparison
of nonlocal means despeckling based on stochastic measures,” IEEE
International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium
(IGARSS), pp.3091-3094, 2015.