In this paper, we present a novel variational plug-and-play algorithm for Poisson inverse problems. Our approach minimizes an explicit functional which is the sum of a Kullback-Leibler data fidelity term and a regularization term based on a pre-trained neural network. By combining classical likelihood maximization methods with recent advances in gradient-based denoisers, we allow the use of pre-trained Gaussian denoisers without sacrificing convergence guarantees. The algorithm is formulated in the majorization-minimization framework, which guarantees convergence to a stationary point. Numerical experiments confirm state-of-the-art performance in deconvolution and tomography under moderate noise, and demonstrate clear superiority in high-noise conditions, making this method particularly valuable for nuclear medicine applications.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Left: Deconvolution on the Leaves image from the Set3c dataset with the Gaussian kernel and noise level ζ=60 . Right: Same image and kernel, with noise level ζ=5 . All images were produced from the same measurement data. Evolution of the PSNR and the gap between iterates have been plotted for theoretically convergent methods.
Kernels
Gaussian
Levin1
Levin4
Uniform
Average
ζ
Methods
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
60
RL-TV [ 11 ]
24.78
0.610
0.425
23.33
0.520
0.493
24.00
0.544
0.440
23.80
0.568
0.474
23.98
0.561
0.458
DPS [ 36 ]
20.41
0.469
0.549
21.98
0.545
0.382
22.85
0.580
0.380
18.56
0.404
0.567
20.95
0.499
0.469
Prox-DiffPIR [ 37 ]
26.04
0.688
0.337
25.31
0.632
0.307
26.31
0.676
0.255
24.97
0 .630
0.391
25.66
0.656
0.322
PhD-Net [ 38 ]
26.00
0.685
0.420
24.56
0.608
0.424
25.81
0.665
0.424
24.70
0.618
0.503
25.26
0.644
0.455
DPIR [ 17 ]
2 6.46
0 .701
0.403
2 6.00
0.663
0.420
2 7.03
0.711
0.350
2 4.78
0.618
0.515
2 6.07
0 .673
0.422
TABLE I: Comparison on the Kodak test dataset
Fig. 2: Left: Deconvolution on the Butterfly image from the Set3c dataset with the first Levin real world motion blur kernel and noise level ζ=60 . Right: Same image and kernel, with noise level ζ=5 .
Fig. 3: Top row: PET reconstructions of a representative mid-axial slice from the BrainWeb test dataset, including two hot lesions. Bottom row: MR slice and the corresponding relative error maps for each reconstruction algorithm with respect to the emission map.
Fig. 4: NRMSE values for each method and for different region of interest on the Brainweb test dataset
Fig. 5: Contrast-to-Noise values for each method on the Brainweb test dataset
Fig. 6: Reconstruction of a test slice with the different methods. Top row: 128 views with the lowest Gaussian noise level, which was used to train the fully-supervised methods PD-Net and FBP-SwinIR. Bottom row: 128 views with the highest Gaussian noise level, which was never seen during the training of the fully supervised methods.
192 angles
128 angles
64 angles
σ
Methods
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
MAE (HU) ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
MAE (HU) ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
MAE (HU) ↓
0.005
FBP
17.39 ± 0.72
0.119 ± 0.023
290 ± 31.2
16.60 ± 0.71
0.103 ± 0.021
318 ± 34.0
15.07 ± 0.66
0.077 ± 0.017
378 ± 38.9
MLEM [ 3 ]
28.72 ± 1.06
0.772 ± 0.028
62.7 ± 10.2
28.67 ± 1.06
0.765 ± 0.028
63.1 ± 10.3
28.27 ± 1.04
0.735 ± 0.032
66.7 ± 10.7
PDNet [ 50 ]
3 7.28 ± 0.97
0 .897 ± 0.018
2 4.7 ± 3.2
3 7.05 ± 0.99
0 .893 ± 0.018
2 5.2 ± 3.2
3 4.58 ± 1.08
0 .853 ± 0.022
3 3.4 ± 4.3
FBP-SwinIR [ 51 ]
37.66 ± 1.01
0.903 ± 0.018
23.50 ± 3.1
37.31 ± 1.01
0.898 ± 0.018
24.4 ± 3.2
31.82 ± 1.53
0.796 ± 0.040
45.3 ± 8.0
PnP-MM
36.40 ± 1.09
0.892 ± 0.017
26.53 ± 3.3
36.44 ± 0.94
0.888 ± 0.016
26.9 ± 3.1
35.64 ± 1.19
0.873 ± 0.020
28.6 ± 4.0
TABLE II: Comparison on AAP Mayo test dataset
Fig. 7: Reconstruction of a test slice with the different methods. Top row: 128 views with the lowest Gaussian noise level, which was used to train the fully-supervised methods. Bottom row: 64 views with the lowest Gaussian noise level, which was never seen during the training of the fully supervised methods.
TABLE III: Comparison on the CBSD68 validation dataset
Noise level ( σ )
1
5
10
20
30
40
50
NRMSE (%)
2.18±0.302
3.68±0.414
6.08±0.691
10.4±1.52
13.8±1.96
16.2±2.27
18.6±2.94
TABLE IV: Quantitative denoising performances on the Brainweb test dataset
Table 12
192 angles
128 angles
64 angles
Method
Parameter
σ=0.5%
σ=1%
σ=2%
σ=0.5%
σ=1%
σ=2%
σ=0.5%
σ=1%
σ=2%
MLEM
Iterations
40
35
20
40
35
20
20
20
20
PnP-MM
λ
0.12
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.15
0.15
0.10
0.10
0.10
σ×255
4
4
8
5
5
8
5
8
8
τ
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Iterations
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
TABLE VII: Hyperparameters for the CT reconstruction experiment.
Images are important tools in various sciences. Despite the development of photo-taking tools, creating clear and image without noise remains challenging in practice. In particular, Poisson noise has an effect on medical and astronomical images, and reduces their quality. Additionally, blur is another factor that has an effect on image quality. The problem of image restoration becomes very complicated when we have no information about the Point Spread Function (PSF). These types of problems are known as blind case. However, in some images, such as some astronomical images, the type of PSF can be specified, and these types of problems are known as nonblind problems. Total Variation (TV) is a widely used method for solving such inverse problems, where the selection of the penalty function is the most critical factor that affects the method's performance. In this paper, to improve edge preservation, we employ a reweighted ℓ1-regularization of the fractional order derivative. Furthermore, we propose a nonblind and blind image deblurring approach under Poisson noise using the Minimax Concave Penalty (MCP), which is a continuous, sparsity promoting, and nearly unbiased regularizer. This formulation leads to a nonconvex optimization model. To solve the proposed model, we introduce an efficient numerical algorithm based on the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM) and provide an analysis of its convergence. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm are demonstrated through extensive experiments on various images.
Reza Parvaz
aDepartment of Engineering Sciences, Faculty of Advanced Technologies,Sep University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
Pretrained denoisers provide a powerful way to incorporate image priors into restoration algorithms. Plug-and-Play and RED approaches exploit fixed-noise-level denoisers within first-order optimization schemes, with convergence guarantees, but often struggle to achieve high-quality reconstruction on severely ill-posed inverse problems. In contrast, recent state-of-the-art approaches leverage denoisers derived from flow- or diffusion-based generative models and evaluate them along a sequence of decreasing noise levels. While these methods achieve strong empirical performance, their convergence theory remains limited. In this paper, we bridge this gap by specifically designing an algorithm that combines denoisers at decreasing noise levels with a schedule tailored to ensure convergence. From a Bayesian perspective, we prove that our method converges to a Maximum a Posteriori (MAP) estimate, under suitable assumptions. Subsequently, we apply our method to various ill-posed inverse problems and show that it surpasses convergent methods while competing with state-of-the-art empirical ones.
Alexandre Lagier, Valentine Tosel, Anne Gagneux +2
ENS de Lyon, CNRS, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Inria, LIP UMR 5668, 69342 Lyon Cedex 07, France · Univ. Bordeaux, Inria, Bordeaux INP, IMB, UMR 5251, F-33400 Talence, France · Inria, ENS de Lyon, CNRS, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, LIP UMR 5668, 69342 Lyon Cedex 07, France
Plug-and-Play (PnP) methods solve imaging inverse problems by incorporating deep denoisers into iterative optimization algorithms. Although practical implementations often decrease the denoiser noise level σ along iterations, most existing convergence analyses assume a fixed denoiser. In this work, we establish convergence guarantees for a broad family of Plug-and-Play algorithms with annealed noise level, spanning deterministic methods (RED--GD and PnP--PGD) and stochastic methods (SNORE, equivariant RED, and a variant of PnP--Flow). For each method, we identify an explicit, nonconvex objective associated with the terminal denoising level and prove asymptotic stationarity of the iterates with respect to this objective. Our analysis does not prescribe any decay rate for the noise schedule, and our assumptions cover both learned gradient-step denoisers and exact MMSE denoisers. Overall, our theoretical results bridge the gap between existing PnP convergence theory and the decreasing-denoising practices used by state-of-the-art image restoration methods. We empirically demonstrate the benefits of such schedules and illustrate the predicted convergence behavior on several imaging inverse problems, including inpainting, super-resolution, demosaicing and tomography.