J. Intell. Syst.

2021; 30:240–257

Research Article

Akula Suneetha* and E. Srinivasa Reddy

Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and

Removal in Color Images using Modified
Fuzzy Set Filter
https://doi.org/10.1515/jisys-2019-0211
Received Aug 30, 2019; accepted May 02, 2020

Abstract: In the data collection phase, the digital images are captured using sensors that often contaminated
by noise (undesired random signal). In digital image processing task, enhancing the image quality and reduc-
ing the noise is a central process. Image denoising effectively preserves the image edges to a higher extend in
the flat regions. Several adaptive filters (median filter, Gaussian filter, fuzzy filter, etc.) have been utilized to
improve the smoothness of digital image, but these filters failed to preserve the image edges while removing
noise. In this paper, a modified fuzzy set filter has been proposed to eliminate noise for restoring the digital im-
age. Usually in fuzzy set filter, sixteen fuzzy rules are generated to find the noisy pixels in the digital image. In
modified fuzzy set filter, a set of twenty-four fuzzy rules are generated with additional four pixel locations for
determining the noisy pixels in the digital image. The additional eight fuzzy rules ease the process of finding
the image pixels, whether it required averaging or not. In this scenario, the input digital images were collected
from the underwater photography fish dataset. The efficiency of the modified fuzzy set filter was evaluated
by varying degrees of Gaussian noise (0.01, 0.03, and 0.1 levels of Gaussian noise). For performance evalua-
tion, Structural Similarity (SSIM), Mean Structural Similarity (MSSIM), Mean Square Error (MSE), Normalized
Mean Square Error (NMSE), Universal Image Quality Index (UIQI), Peak Signal to Noise Ratio (PSNR), and Vi-
sual Information Fidelity (VIF) were used. The experimental results showed that the modified fuzzy set filter
improved PSNR value up to 2-3 dB, MSSIM up to 0.12-0.03, and NMSE value up to 0.38-0.1 compared to the
traditional filtering techniques.

Keywords: Denoising, digital image processing, fuzzy filter, fuzzy logic, Gaussian noise

1 Introduction
In recent decades, the digital images are playing an important role in numerous applications like computer
vision, medical imaging, biometrics, etc. and also in the field of engineering science: geographical systems
and astronomy [1, 2]. Due to intrinsic thermal fluctuations, imperfect device data collection and transmis-
sion, imperfection of lens device and external interface, noise is introduced inevitably in the captured digital
images [3, 4]. Image denoising is a key procedure for restoring the noiseless image from the noisy observa-
tions that helps in preserving the edges and textures present in the digital images [5, 6]. Image denoising is
considered as a necessary step in texture analysis, feature extraction and segmentation [7]. There are many
denoising methodologies available for eliminating noise from the digital images. The conventional denoising
algorithms have been developed by considering the parameters like noise and artifacts. The existing denois-
ing methods are categorized into two types such as nonlocal self-similarity based methods and conventional

*Corresponding Author: Akula Suneetha: KKR & KSR Institute of Technology and Sciences, Department of CSE, Guntur,
Andhra Pradesh; Email: sunitha.akula1.cse@gmail.com; sunitha_akula1@yahoo.co.in
E. Srinivasa Reddy: University College of Engineering & Technology, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Department of CSE, Nagar-
juna Nagar, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh; Email: edara_67@yahoo.com

Open Access. © 2020 A. Suneetha and E. Srinivasa Reddy, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
 Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and Removal in Color Images using Modified Fuzzy Set Filter | 241

local prior based methods. Mostly, the existing methods concentrate only on local priors, so their perfor-
mances are inadequate [8–10].
Image filtering is another important technique in image denoising that alters the image features (size,
color, shading, etc.) for smoothening the digital images [11]. The filtering denoising methodologies has two
steps, those are noise reduction filter adjusts the pixels and classifies as noise-corrupted and then the impulse
detector classifies the image pixels as noise-free or noise-corrupted. The three major types of noises exist in
digital images are additive noise, multiplicative noise, and impulse noise [12]. Generally, the impulse noise is
characterized by a few portions of image pixels that corrupt and leaves the remaining pixels unchanged. In
addition, it is more challenging to remove additive and multiplicative noise from the digital images, because
the noise intensity varies with the signal intensity (for instance, speckle noise) [13]. In order to remove these
noises, several filtering techniques developed, those are median filter, Gaussian filter, fuzzy filter, etc. [14, 15].
The existing conventional filters are effective to eliminate the noise, but also it fails to preserve the image
details, due to blurring at the edges. The concerns of traditional fuzzy filtering approaches are detailed below.
• An iterative based adaptive fuzzy filter is used for eliminating the salt and pepper noise in the digital
images [16]. The drawback of this approach is assigning weight value to the good pixels in the window
by using the inverse distance weight function. Hence, the developed fuzzy filter fails to preserve the
digital image details.
• An effective noise reduction method named as adaptive fuzzy switching median filter is employed for
digital image denoising [17]. This technique is only applicable for the impulse noise removal, not for
continuous noise, low frequency noise, etc.
• Additionally, expert knowledge requires for designing the member function and selecting the suitable
rules in the fuzzy system. Otherwise, the issues lie with weighting of good pixels leads to the loss of
actual image details.
To overcome the above-mentioned drawbacks, a modified fuzzy set filter is proposed for eliminating Gaus-
sian noise from the digital images. Gaussian noise is a statistical noise having a probability density function
equal to the normal distribution, which is also named as Gaussian distribution. Generally, the fuzzy filter
comprises of two essential factors; initially the filter calculates “fuzzy derivative” to reduce variations in the
digital images. Secondly, the membership functions (small, positive, and negative) are utilized based on the
noise level to accomplish fuzzy smoothing. In modified fuzzy set filter, after computing fuzzy derivative, a set
of twenty-four fuzzy rules are generated with truth values for determining the correction term or noisy pixels.
In this research, additional four pixel locations added to the fixed directions, especially for South West (SW),
South East (SE), North East (NE), and North West (NW) directions. Hence, the generated twenty-four fuzzy
rules mathematically represented in Table 1. If the mean of the truth-value satisfies the threshold value, aver-
aging is performed. The residual noiseless pixels are retained by indicating the pixel as edge. The additional
four pixel locations will ease the process of finding the pixels, whether it required averaging or not. Instead of
using a larger window to achieve better results for heavier noise, the extra four pixel locations (each includes
two fuzzy rules) consider more corner pixel information for estimating the amount of noise. The detailed
description about modified fuzzy set filter is given in the section 3.
This research paper is arranged as follows. In section 2, several recent image denoising methodologies are
surveyed. In section 3, explanation about modified fuzzy set filter is described for achieving a better outcome.
In section 4, execution of the modified fuzzy set filter is done and the comparative analysis is performed
between the proposed and existing methods. The conclusion is made in section 5.

2 Literature Survey
The researchers have developed several research techniques on image denoising. This sub-section describes
a few important contributions to the existing literatures.
242 | A. Suneetha and E. Srinivasa Reddy

X. Zhang [18] presented an effective image denoising methodology based on the local Weiner filter. In
this research, the noisy images were decomposed by utilizing Non-Subsampled Shearlet Transform (NSST),
because it is an active multi-directional and multi-scalable analyzing tool in image denoising. The high fre-
quency NSST coefficients were denoised by utilizing a shrinkage function on the basis of Wiener filter. In
the new shrinkage function, the local Wiener filter was used by employing Linear Expansion of Thresholds
and Stein’s Unbiased Risk Estimate (LET-SURE) methodology. At last, the inverse-NSST was used for obtain-
ing the denoised image. In the experimental stage, the developed methodology delivered better performance
related to the existing wavelet based methodologies. The developed methodology is subjected to human er-
ror, as only classical image databases were considered for experimental analysis and not real time images.
In addition, a new image denoising method was presented by J. Liu et al. [19] using multidirectional shrink-
age and sparse representation of the edges. The sparsity improvement was achieved by utilizing directionlet
transforms, which was constructed with the edge directions. The directionlet transform was performed in
dissimilar directions for every pixel, so several estimates were obtained in that one of which was optimal.
The final denoised output image was achieved by averaging the weight value of all individual estimates. The
experimental result confirmed that the developed methodology effectively preserved the information (image
texture and edges) and removed the noise compared to the other multi-directional wavelet methods. The semi-
supervised methodology maximizes the semantic gap between the image feature values, which leads to poor
detection rate.
K. Panetta et al. [20] presented a new idea of the Sequence-to-Sequence Similarity (SSS) measure to deter-
mine the similarity content (edge information) between the images. The developed methodology completely
depends on the block and pixel similarity. For addressing the image denoising problems, the new SSS filter
utilized the edge information in the denoised or corrupted image. The developed methodology’s performance
was experimented by using different images with a variety of Gaussian noise levels. In the experimental sec-
tion, the developed methodology was experimented quantitatively and visually. The developed framework
showed an effective outcome compared to the previous block-to-block similarity and pixel to pixel similarity.
In this research, it was so difficult to remove the machinery noises, due to lower level alignment. Additionally,
a new algorithm was developed by H.K. Rafsanjani, et al. [21] to select the diffusion coefficients using the gra-
dient magnitude and residual local power. The developed algorithm effectively preserved the image details
like edges and textures, because the texture region corresponds to the value of local power residue. For eval-
uating the developed algorithm performance, a variety of experiments were performed by means of visual
quality, universal quality index, visual information, mean structural similarity and PSNR. The developed al-
gorithm was linear in nature, so the diffusion coefficients were constant that leads to isotropic diffusion, and
therefore it blurs the image edges to some extent.
Q. Guo, et al. [22] developed a simple denoising system using the low rank approximation and the non-
local self-similarity. Initially, the similar image patches were classified by employing block matching scheme
to generate the same patch groups. Then, each similar patched group was factorized by Singular Value De-
composition (SVD). Finally, a denoised grayscale image was created by combining all processed patches. Ex-
perimental outcome confirmed that the developed technique out-performed the existing schemes by means
of PSNR and patch size. Generally, the fixed wavelet decomposition fails to provide an adaptive sparse rep-
resentation of a complex image. In addition, an effective methodology (cohesive super-pixel) was presented
by P. Fu et al. [23] to decompose the noisy image into patches for increasing the homogeneity. Additionally, a
new pixel based similarity measure was developed for making the cohesive super-pixel method more robust
to noise. Then, they combined the histogram based homogeneous super-pixel selection and the filter based
noise level estimation to determine the noise level accurately in the digital image. Extensive experiments were
performed on the “Fish” image in the Berkeley segmentation database (BSD) database for demonstrating the
effectiveness of the developed methodology. A major concern in the developed methodology was more com-
plex to identify the projection of free space. Free space can able to provide better discriminant ability in image
feature estimation.
J. Bai, and X.C. Feng, [24] introduced generalized anisotropic diffusion equation for image denoising.
Initially, a new derivative (G-derivative) was utilized for generalizing the anisotropic diffusion equation us-
ing Fourier transform. All the G-derivation operators were ring like structure and the semi-group property
 Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and Removal in Color Images using Modified Fuzzy Set Filter | 243

of G-derivation contains semi-group property of fractional derivative. Therefore, the resultant generalized
anisotropic diffusions were the generalized order of fractional anisotropic diffusions. A validation result con-
firmed that the developed technique was very effective related to the existing schemes. A major issue in the
developed methodology was how to preserve the image edges, while reducing the noise. Additionally, R. Hao,
and Z. Su, [25], developed a new patch based methodology for recovering a low rank tensor by using low-rank
matrix factorization. Additionally, the lagrangian alternating minimization methodology was implemented
to identify the un-known rank. The developed method was applied to multi-frame image denoising by ex-
ploiting the non-local self-similarity. Experimental outcome showed that the developed method effectively
preserves the sharpness of essential image structures compared to the existing image denoising methodolo-
gies. The outcome of this research was highly volatile and subject to the human assumptions and intervention,
while estimating the noise.
K.B. Khan, et al. [26] developed an Adaptive Trimmed Mean Autoregressive (ATMAR) method to denoise
the medical images from Poisson noise. Initially, the noisy digital images were divided into smaller portions
and then ATMAR method was applied to find the central pixel value of the digital image. In addition, the
adaptive autoregressive coefficients were updated by sliding the windows with 60% shift. At last, power law
transformation was used to stretch the contrast of the image. In the experimental section, the developed
method showed better outcomes compared to the prior research works in light of MSE, correlation, SSIM
and PSNR. A key concern in the adaptive trimmed mean filter is to select the optimal alpha parameter for
a specific noise type. In addition, K.B. Khan, et al. [27] presented a new weighted gradient filter to denoise
the medical images from Poisson noise. In a predetermined window, weighted gradient filter was utilized
to calculate the gradient value, and then the center pixel gradient values were averaged. In this research
study, the developed method performance was evaluated on both multimedia and biomedical images. Hence,
the developed filtering method was computationally effective and faster compared to the existing filtering
techniques. In contrast, a major issue with weighted gradient filter is the cost of increment on running times.
To overcome the above-mentioned issues, a modified fuzzy set filter is proposed to enhance the performance
of image processing applications like object extraction, segmentation, etc.

3 Proposed Methodology
Denoising the digital image is an active research area in the field of digital image processing. In these days,
the digital images are used in many applications for the intended operations like feature extraction, segmen-
tation, dimensionality reduction, etc. Therefore, it is necessary to select an appropriate (noiseless) digital
image; if the data are not acquired satisfactorily then the intended operations may not be achievable. Gen-
erally, the fuzzy denoising is accomplished by mapping a fuzzy plane into the image gray level intensities
by utilizing membership function. Then, modify the membership functions for image enhancement and map
the fuzzy plane into image gray level intensities. The modified fuzzy set filter consists of five steps; image
collection, image fuzzification, membership function, fuzzy logic-fuzzy set theory and defuzzification. The
working procedure of modified fuzzy set filter is presented in Figure 1. The brief description about modified
fuzzy set filter is given below.

Figure 1: Work flow of modified fuzzy set filter

244 | A. Suneetha and E. Srinivasa Reddy

In this research paper, a modified fuzzy set filter is developed for eliminating noise from the digital im-
ages I, which are corrupted by Gaussian noise. At first, the noise level is estimated from the images, which
are going to be denoised. Then, fuzzy differential is calculated to classify the local variations of image fea-
tures like noise and edges. In addition, the membership functions are applied on the basis of noise level and
then fuzzy smoothing is performed for image denoising. Based on the local image properties, the fuzzy rules
are generated. The generated fuzzy rules along with membership function evaluates the level of smoothing.
The membership function is altered after every iteration for small and the membership function is fixed for
both positive and negative [28]. Generally, in fuzzy set filter, sixteen fuzzy rules are generated for identify-
ing the noisy pixels in the digital image. In modified fuzzy set filter, twenty-four rules are generated by the
truth-values. If the mean of truth-value satisfies the threshold value and then averaging is performed. The
remaining noiseless pixels are retained by indicating the pixel as edge. Graphical depiction of fuzzy set filter
and modified fuzzy set filter patterns are denoted in Figure 2.

(a) (b)

Figure 2: a) Fuzzy set filter pattern, and b) modified fuzzy set filter pattern

3.1 Fuzzy Differential

Normally, the fuzzy filter recovers the original digital image from the noise and retains the important image
features like edges by averaging an image pixel with neighborhoods. Initially, the fuzzy filter classifies the
random variations generated by image structures and noise. The 3 × 3 image pixel has eight directions, such
as N, S, W, E, NW, NE, SW, and SE. For each pixel, a value is calculated to specify the amount of fuzzy dif-
ferential in a given direction. The respective value is calculated using the generated fuzzy rules. Graphical
representation of central pixel with eight neighborhood pixels is denoted in Figure 3.
• If the fuzzy differential is high, the pixel is considered as edge.
• If the fuzzy differential is low, the pixel is assumed as noisy pixel.

Figure 3: Central pixel p (x, y) with eight neighborhood pixel

A simple fuzzy differential is obtained by computing the difference between central pixel p(x, y) and its
neighbor pixels in the direction. The differential value is represented as d D (x, y). The membership functions
 Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and Removal in Color Images using Modified Fuzzy Set Filter | 245

(small, positive, and negative) are graphically represented in Figure 4, where L is denoted as an effective
parameter that is determined using effective filtering approach. The pixels involved to determine the fuzzy
differential in each direction are given in Table 1 [15].

Figure 4: Graphical illustration of membership function

Table 1: Pixels used for calculating the fuzzy differential in every direction

Direction Position Set (x, y)

NW (x-1, y-1) {(−1,1), (0,0), (1,−1)}
{(−1,−1), (0,0), (1,1)}
W (x-1, y) {(0,1), (0,0), (0,−1)}
SW (x-1, y+1) {(1,1), (0,0), (−1,−1)}
{(−1,1), (0,0), (1,−1)}
S (x, y+1) {(1,0), (0,0), (−1,0)}
SE (x+1, y+1) {(1,−1), (0,0), (−1,1)}
{(1,1), (0,0), (−1,−1)}
E (x+1, y) {(0,−1), (0,0),(0,1)}
NE (x+1, y-1) {(−1,−1), (0,0), (1,1)}
{(−1,1), (0,0), (1,−1)}
N (x, y-1) {(−1,0), (0,0), (1,0)}

3.2 Pixel Correction using Fuzzy Filter

In this sub-section, the purpose of utilizing fuzzy differential or fuzzy derivative is detailed effectively. If sup-
pose, an edge passes through the neighborhood direction (NE-SW), the fuzzy differential indicates the differ-
ential value d SE (x, y) and the neighborhood pixels are orthogonal to the edge direction that are considered
to be high. Table 1 denotes the pixels used for calculating the fuzzy differential in every direction. In case,
if two among three differentials are small, then it is safe to believe that no edge is present in the respective
direction. The fuzzy differential values are determined by formulating the fuzzy rule on the basis of observa-
tion. Further, calculate the values that show the amount to which the fuzzy differential is small in a certain
direction, a fuzzy set small is represented in Figure 4.
In this research, L is represented as an effective parameter, which is determined by using effective filtering
approach. In determining the degree of membership of the fuzzy differentials df D (x, y) , D ∈ DIR to the set
small, similar twelve such rules are generated. These rules are generated by using AND and OR operator. For
instance, the value of fuzzy derivative df N (x, y) for the pixel (x, y) in the N direction is determined by apply-
246 | A. Suneetha and E. Srinivasa Reddy

ing the following rule; if (d N (x, y) is small, and d N (x − 1, y) is small) or (d N (x, y) is small, and d N (x + 1, y) is
small) or (d N (x − 1, y) is small, and d N (x + 1, y) is small), then df N (x, y) is small. Likewise, if (d N (x, y) is pos-
itive or negative, and d N (x − 1, y) is positive or negative) or (d N (x, y) is positive or negative, and d N (x + 1, y)
is positive or negative) or (d N (x − 1, y) is positive or negative, and d N (x + 1, y) is positive or negative), then
df N (x, y) is positive or negative.
In the application of differential, fuzzy defuzzification is not required for the membership degree small
that is considered in the next phase (smoothing). The smooth pixel sets are identified by employing a fuzzy
rule for every direction. The generated rules are used to identify the effective differential value by assuming
no edges in the direction. Since, the fuzzy differential rule is used to check, whether the edge is available
or not. Then, defuzzification is accomplished for filtering in order to get a smoothed image by averaging the
pixel value. A fuzzy rule is utilized to determine, whether the pixels required averaging or not. To perform
this process, the truth-value of each pixel for all directions is aggregated, which is mathematically denoted
in the equations (1) and (2).
⎧ ⎫
⎨4 0 ≤ ne < 4 ⎪
⎪ ⎬
i = 2 4 ≤ ne < 10 (1)
⎪
⎩1 ⎪
ne ≥ 10 ⎭

√︀
(0.5) × π
ne = σ × (2)
(6 × (n − 2) × (m − 2))

Where, ne is represented as noise estimate, (m, n) are denoted as image rows and columns, i is represented as
a threshold, and σ is achieved using a Laplacian of Gaussian mask on the digital image. Usually, the Gaussian
noise appeared as white intensity pixel values in the image, which has a Probability Density Function (PDF)
with normal or Gaussian distribution. Therefore, it is additive in nature and every pixel value in the noisy
image is the addition of the original pixel with a random Gaussian distributed noise value. Hence, the PDF of
Gaussian random value is indicated in equation (3).
1 2 2
p (z) = √ e[−(z−µ) /2σ ] (3)
2πσ
Where, σ and µ are indicated as standard deviation and mean, z is indicated as pixel value, p(z) is denoted
as Gaussian noise in the image, and π is 3.1416. The neighborhood pixels’ mean is obtained in this section
and considered as a new pixel, otherwise the original pixel is retained.

3.3 Effective Filtering Approach

Usually, the large window delivers better results, when the digital image I has more noise. In a few conditions,
the large window losses the image features like edges and feature information. To address this concern, an
effective filter is applied iteratively by altering the small membership function shape. After every iteration,
the parameters are modified on the basis of noise level for reducing the smoothing amount.The digital image
is categorized into small n × n non-overlapping blocks. For each n block, the standard deviation σ ij is calcu-
lated. The minimum σ of non-overlapping block is identified that is represented as σ min . At last, an effective
parameter Lis determined by multiplying an amplification factor ∀ with σ min . The amplification factor ∀ is
evaluated by using the equation (4), which is completely based on the image noise level.
⎧ ⎫
⎪1
⎪ 0 ≤ ne < 4 ⎪
⎪
⎪3 4 ≤ ne < 10 ⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨ 4 10 ≤ ne < 20⎪
⎪ ⎬
∀= (4)
⎪
⎪ 6 20 ≤ ne < 30⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ 7 30 ≤ ne < 40⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎩ ⎭
10 ne ≥ 40
 Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and Removal in Color Images using Modified Fuzzy Set Filter | 247

The amplification factor ∀ is set proportional to the noise level for an effective denoising. Based on the
noise estimate (ne), the number of iterations is decided. The equation (5) represents the condition for a num-
ber of iterations.
⎧ ⎫
⎨1 0 ≤ ne < 4 ⎪
⎪ ⎬
Iterations = 2 4 ≤ ne < 50 (5)
⎪
⎩3 ⎪
ne ≥ 50 ⎭

Algorithm of modified fuzzy set filter

Step 1 Function d D = Direction (I)

{
For Every Pixel p xy in I
d N (x, y) = p (x − 1, y) − p (x, y) ;
d NE (x, y) = p (x − 1, y + 1) − p (x, y) ;
d NW (x, y) = p (x − 1, y − 1) − p (x, y) ;
d S (x, y) = p (x + 1, y) − p (x, y) ;
d SE (x, y) = p (x + 1, y + 1) − p (x, y) ;
d SW (x, y) = p (x + 1, y − 1) − p (x, y) ;
d E (x, y) = p (x, y + 1) − p (x, y) ;
d W (x, y) = p (x, y − 1) − p (x, y) ;
d D = [d N d NE d NW d S d SE d SW d E d W ] ;
}

Step 2 Function L = Adaptation (I, ∀)

{
For non-over-lapping block, create a sliding window of size (n × n)
for x = 1 : n : row size
for y = ∑︀
1 : n : column size
I(x,y))
µ xy = ( (n×n) ;
√︁ ∑︀
(I(x,y)−µ xy )2
σ xy = (n×n)
;
σ min = min (σ xy );
L = ∀σ min ;
}
248 | A. Suneetha and E. Srinivasa Reddy

Step 3 Function [I, ap] = Averaging (d D , I, L, i)

{
For Every Pixel p xy in I
if (d D (x, y) < L) and (d D (previous) < L)
or (d D (x, y) < L) and (d D (next) < L)
or (d D (previous) < L) and (d D (next) < L) then
df D (x, y) = 1 − d D (x,y)
L ;
else
df D (x, y) = 0;
if (df D (x, y) < L) and (df D (x, y) <> 0) then
Assign c D = 1;
Compute c D for all directions;
∑︀
ap(x, y) c D ;
if (ap(x, y) ≥ i) then
D(x, y) = mean {I(x, y), I(x − 1, y), I(x + 1, y),
I (x − 1, y − 1) , I (x + 1, y + 1) , I (x + 1, y − 1),
I (x − 1, y + 1) , I (x, y − 1) , I (x, y + 1)};
}

Step 4 Function I = Main(I)

{
[d D ] = Direction (I)
Select ∀, iusing the Equations (1) and (4)
L = Adaptation (I, ∀)
D = Averaging (d D , I, L, i)
Compute PSNR, MSSIM, SSIM, MSE, UIQI, VIF and NMSE }

4 Experimental Analysis and Discussion

In this section, experimental result and discussion of modified fuzzy set filter is detailed and explained about
the experimental set-up and performance measures. The modified fuzzy set filter’s performance is also eval-
uated in light of comparative and quantitative analysis.

4.1 Experimental Setup

The modified fuzzy set filter was experimented by utilizing MATLAB (version 2017a) with 4 GB RAM, 3.0 GHz
Intel i3 processor and 500 GB hard disc [29]. The modified fuzzy set filter’s performance was compared with
a few existing filters in order to estimate the efficiency of proposed filter. The performance evaluation of the
modified fuzzy set filter was made under the circumstance of noise attack (Gaussian noise) in terms of PSNR,
MSSIM, SSIM, MSE, UIQI, VIF and NMSE.

4.2 Performance Measure

In this research, PSNR, MSSIM, SSIM, MSE, UIQI, VIF and NMSE performance measures are utilized for com-
′
paring the performance evaluation of noisy image k(x, y)and denoised image k (x, y). Usually, the PSNR value
′
is utilized as a quality measurement between the denoised k (x, y) and noisy image k(x, y). The high PSNR
value determines the best quality of denoised image [30]. Mostly, the PSNR value is defined by MSE that is
 Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and Removal in Color Images using Modified Fuzzy Set Filter | 249

mathematically denoted in equation (6),

m−1 n−1 ⃦ ⃦2
1 ∑︁ ∑︁ ⃦ ′
MSE = ⃦k (x, y) − k (x, y)⃦ (6)
⃦
mn
x=0 y=0

Where, m and n are indicated as image dimensions (rows and columns) and k (x, y) is denoted as the
′
input image, k (x, y) is denoted as denoised image. Another criterion, which is used for evaluating the PSNR
value is given in equation (7),
max(k (x, y))
PSNR = 20 log 10 ( √ ) (7)
MSE
In addition, the effectiveness of modified fuzzy set filter is further analyzed by using the performance
metrics like NMSE, MSSIM, and UIQI [31, 32], which are mathematically given in the equations (8), (9), (10),
and (11).
∑︀m−1 ∑︀n−1 ′ 2
x=0 y=0 [k ( x, y ) − k (x, y)]
NMSE = ∑︀m−1 ∑︀n−1 2
(8)
x=0 y=0 [k ( x, y )]

(2µ i µ j + c1 )(2σ ij + c2 )
SSIM (i, j) = (9)
(µ i2 + µ j2 + c1 )(σ i2 + σ j2 + c2 )
′
Where, i and j are represented as windows in the original k and denoised image k , σ and µ are denoted
as standard deviation and mean of i and j, and c1 and c2 are represented as constants. The mean of SSIM is
denoted in equation (10).
W
′ 1 ∑︁
MSSIM(k, k ) = (SSIM(i, j)) (10)
W
y=1

Where, W is stated as windows in the image.

4µ i µ j µ ij
UIQI (i, j) = l (i, j) .c (i, j) .s (i, j) = (11)
(µ i2 + µ j2 )(σ i2 + σ j2 )
2µ i µ j 2σ i σ j 2σ i,j
Where, l (i, j) = µ i2 +µ j2 , c (i, j) = σ i2 +σ j2 , and s (i, j) = σ i +σ j . In that, µ i µ j is denoted as mean values
of original and denoised image, σ i σ j is represented as standard deviation of original and denoised image
and σ ij indicates covariance of both original and denoised images. In addition, VIF helps in calculating the
′
distortion or similarity between noisy image k and denoised image k , which is mathematically denoted in
equation (12).
′
M(k; k )
VIF = (12)
M(k; h)
′
Where, h is the image that the human visual system perceives. The mutual information M(k; k ) and
M(k; h) represented as extracted information.

4.3 Data Collection

An extensively applied dataset underwater photography fish is utilized for investigating the performance
of modified fuzzy set filter. The undertaken dataset comprises of 1559 different species (parrot-fish, angel-
fish, butterfly-fish, etc.) with 8330 images. Generally, the underwater images have poor contrast, so a pre-
processing method (contrast enhancement) is preferred for enhancing the quality of images. When contrast
enhancement is applied to the noisy images, it resulted in amplifying the noise artifacts. Therefore, contrast
enhancement is carried-out on the underwater images, which have low estimated noise. The preferred under-
water images for experimental analysis are presented in Figure 5.
250 | A. Suneetha and E. Srinivasa Reddy

Figure 5: a) Image A with 3.46 ne b) Image B with 2.60 ne c) Image C with 1.34 ne

4.4 Quantitative Analysis

In this sub-section, the underwater photography fish dataset is used to assess the performance of modified
fuzzy set filter. In this research, performance evaluation of proposed filter is validated in light of PSNR, MSSIM,
SSIM, MSE, UIQI, VIF and NMSE. Here, the performance evaluation is validated for three random underwater
images with 0.01, 0.03 and 0.1 level of Gaussian noise. In Table 2, the performance of the modified fuzzy set
filter is validated by adding 0.01 level of Gaussian noise in the original underwater images.

Table 2: Performance of modified fuzzy set filter by adding 0.01 level of Gaussian noise

Image Gaussian noise=0.01 Level

PSNR (dB) NMSE MSSIM SSIM UIQI MSE VIF
A 24.94 0.0038 0.3061 0.5135 0.2148 0.0047 0.721
B 22.21 0.0060 0.6552 0.6554 0.3882 0.0060 0.677
C 23.25 0.0046 0.2979 0.7387 0.4068 0.0070 0.7148

The modified fuzzy set filter averagely delivered 23.4667 dB of PSNR, 0.0048 of NMSE value, 0.4197 of
MSSIM value, 0.6358 of SSIM value, 0.3366 of UIQI value, 0.0059 of MSE value, and 0.704 of VIF value. In
Table 2, image A achieved better results by means of PSNR, NMSE, MSSIM, SSIM, UIQI, MSE, and VIF values
(24.94, 0.0038, 0.3061, 0.5135, 0.2148, 0.0047, and 0.721). The noisy image (with 0.01 level of Gaussian noise)
and denoised image are denoted in Figure 6.
Additionally, the modified fuzzy set filter is validated by adding 0.03 level of Gaussian noise in the original
underwater images, which detailed in Table 3. The modified fuzzy set filter achieved 24.09 dB of PSNR, 0.0040
of NMSE value, 0.3086 of MSSIM value, 0.5109 of SSIM value, 0.2165 of UIQI, 0.00526 of MSE value, and 0.7151
of VIF value for an image A, which showed better result by means of PSNR, NMSE, MSSIM, SSIM, UIQI, MSE,
and VIF related to other two images. Similarly, the image B and C achieved 21.83 dB and 22.73 dB of PSNR,
0.0060 and 0.0048 of NMSE value, 0.6510 and 0.2932 of MSSIM value, 0.6559 and 0.7332 of SSIM value, 0.3902
and 0.4047 of UIQI value, 0.0065 and 0.00750 of MSE value, and 0.674 and 0.7136 of VIF value. The noisy
image with 0.03 level of Gaussian noise and denoised image are denoted in Figure 7.
In addition, the modified fuzzy set filter is analyzed with higher level of noise (0.1 Gaussian noise level)
that is explained in Table 4. In image A, the modified fuzzy set filter attained 18.70 dB of PSNR, 0.0067 of NMSE
value, 0.4144 of MSSIM, 0.5025 of SSIM, 0.2122 of UIQI, 0.0134 of MSE, and 0.7305 of VIF. Correspondingly, the
images B and C attained 18.32 dB and 18.27 dB of PSNR, 0.0074 and 0.0048 of NMSE value, 0.6374 and 0.3121
of MSSIM value, 0.6415 and 0.7012 of SSIM value, 0.3799 and 0.3922 of UIQI value, 0.0147 and 0.01487 of MSE
value, and 0.6693 and 0.72485 of VIF value. The noisy image with 0.1 Gaussian noise level and denoised image
are denoted in Figure 8.
 Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and Removal in Color Images using Modified Fuzzy Set Filter | 251

Image A

Image B

Image C

Figure 6: (a) Images with 0.01 Level Gaussian noise, (b) Denoised images

Table 3: Performance of modified fuzzy set filter by adding 0.03 level of Gaussian noise

Image Gaussian noise=0.03 Level

PSNR (dB) NMSE MSSIM SSIM UIQI MSE VIF
A 24.09 0.0040 0.3086 0.5109 0.2165 0.00526 0.7151
B 21.83 0.0060 0.6510 0.6559 0.3902 0.0065 0.674
C 22.73 0.0048 0.2932 0.7332 0.4047 0.00750 0.7136

Image A

Image B

Image C

7 ( )I i h 0 03 L l G i i (b) D i di
Figure 7: (a) Images with 0.03 Level Gaussian noise, (b) Denoised images
252 | A. Suneetha and E. Srinivasa Reddy

Table 4: Performance of modified fuzzy set filter by adding 0.1 level of Gaussian noise

Image Gaussian noise=0.1 Level

PSNR (dB) NMSE MSSIM SSIM UIQI MSE VIF
A 18.70 0.0067 0.4144 0.5025 0.2122 0.0134 0.7305
B 18.32 0.0074 0.6374 0.6415 0.3799 0.0147 0.6693
C 18.27 0.0048 0.3121 0.7012 0.3922 0.01487 0.72485

Image A

Image B

Image C

(a) (b)

Figure 8: (a) Images with 0.1 Level Gaussian noise, (b) Denoised images

4.5 Comparative Analysis

Currently, patch based methodologies are used for image denoising, but these approaches require a lot of
edge information and similar image patches, which is limited in underwater images. In this study, a modi-
fied fuzzy set filter is proposed for distinguishing the noise and edge of the underwater images. In Table 5,
the comparative analysis is done between the modified fuzzy set filter and the traditional filters (mean filter
[33], Wiener filter [33], Triangle Fuzzy Filter with Median Center (TMED) [33], Asymmetrical Triangle Fuzzy
Filter with Median Center (ATMED) [33], Symmetrical Triangle Fuzzy Filter with Average Center (TMAV) [33],
Adaptive Fuzzy filter (AFF) [33], Non-Local Means (NLM) filter, and Weighted Gradient Filter (WGF)). Here, the
efficiency of the modified fuzzy set filter is verified by adding Gaussian noise (noise level=0.01, and 0.03). The
traditional filters work averagely in the noisy pixels, so it attains average texture information compared to
proposed filter.

4.5.1 Performance Evaluation using PSNR

In this section, the performance of modified fuzzy set filter and the existing filters (mean filter [33], Wiener
filter [33], TMED [33], ATMED [33], TMAV [33], AFF [33], NLM filter and WGF) evaluated by utilizing underwater
fish dataset. Here, the proposed and existing filters evaluated by means of PSNR value for both Gaussian noise
levels (0.01 and 0.03). In Table 5, the modified fuzzy set filter averagely achieved 23.175 dB of PSNR value and
 Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and Removal in Color Images using Modified Fuzzy Set Filter | 253

Table 5: Comparative analysis between modified fuzzy set filter and existing filters

Image Filters Gaussian noise=0.01 Level Gaussian noise=0.03 Level

PSNR (dB) NMSE MSSIM PSNR (dB) NMSE MSSIM
A Mean [33] 19.83 0.018 0.64 15.88 0.046 0.55
Wiener [33] 20.94 0.014 0.54 16.99 0.037 0.48
TMED [33] 19.10 0.020 0.56 15.15 0.052 0.44
ATMED [33] 20.64 0.015 0.71 16.49 0.038 0.69
TMAV [33] 20.22 0.016 0.69 16.21 0.040 0.61
AFF [33] 20.96 0.013 0.65 16.87 0.035 0.57
NLM 21.37 0.0072 0.36 20.78 0.011 0.51
WGF 22.01 0.0061 0.35 21.71 0.0091 0.48
Proposed 24.94 0.0038 0.3061 24.09 0.0040 0.3086
B Mean [33] 19.61 0.043 0.74 15.34 0.105 0.62
Wiener [33] 20.65 0.036 0.70 16.31 0.089 0.58
TMED [33] 19.28 0.048 0.72 14.92 0.123 0.58
ATMED [33] 20.33 0.039 0.82 15.85 0.099 0.74
TMAV [33] 20.07 0.040 0.80 15.68 0.104 0.71
AFF [33] 20.68 0.032 0.77 16.25 0.091 0.66
NLM 20.39 0.0072 0.68 17.73 0.071 0.67
WGF 20.99 0.0069 0.66 19.09 0.021 0.66
Proposed 22.21 0.0060 0.6552 21.83 0.0060 0.6510
C Mean [33] 19.90 0.035 0.58 16.01 0.085 0.39
Wiener [33] 21.22 0.029 0.69 17.07 0.062 0.59
TMED [33] 19.57 0.039 0.68 15.32 0.102 0.52
ATMED [33] 20.82 0.029 0.82 16.63 0.075 0.76
TMAV [33] 20.51 0.032 0.79 16.36 0.080 0.69
AFF [33] 21.22 0.026 0.77 17.09 0.068 0.67
NLM 21.76 0.015 0.41 18.76 0.069 0.68
WGF 22.14 0.0082 0.39 20.55 0.057 0.52
Proposed 23.25 0.0046 0.2979 22.73 0.0048 0.2932

the traditional filters mean filter, Wiener filter, TMED, ATMED, TMAV, AFF, NLM filter and WGF delivered 17.76
dB, 18.863 dB, 17.22 dB, 18.46 dB, 18.175 dB, 18.845 dB, 20.13 dB, and 21.08 dB. Graphical comparison of PSNR
value for both existing and proposed filter is denoted in the Figures 9 and 10.

Figure 9: Graphical comparison of PSNR value (0.01 Level Gaussian noise)

254 | A. Suneetha and E. Srinivasa Reddy

Figure 10: Graphical comparison of PSNR value (0.03 Level Gaussian noise)

4.5.2 Performance Evaluation using NMSE

Inspecting the Table 5, the modified fuzzy set filter outperformed with higher NMSE value of 0.0038 in an
image A as compared to the traditional filters such as mean filter [33], Wiener filter [33], TMED [33], ATMED
[33], TMAV [33], AFF [33], NLM filter and WGF. The existing filters achieved minimum NMSE value, compared
to modified fuzzy set filter. The graphical comparison of NMSE value for both existing and proposed filter is
indicated in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Graphical comparison of NMSE value (0.01 and 0.03 Level Gaussian noise)

4.5.3 Performance Evaluation using MSSIM

In this experimental research, the validation outcome is carried out in two phases such as adding Gaussian
with 0.01 and adding Gaussian with 0.03. The average MSSIM value of modified fuzzy set filter achieved 0.4186
and the existing filters (mean filter [33], Wiener filter [33], TMED [33], ATMED [33], TMAV [33], AFF [33], NLM
filter and WGF), which delivers 0.5867, 0.5967. 0.5834, 0.7567, 0.715, 0.68167, 0.55167, and 0.51 of average MSSIM
values. The graphical comparison of MSSIM value for existing and proposed filter is represented in Figure 12.
The experimental outcome of the overall results stated that modified fuzzy set filter worked effectively in
underwater images compared to other traditional filters. Also, it is identified that the modified fuzzy set filter
able to perform both visually and subjectively.
 Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and Removal in Color Images using Modified Fuzzy Set Filter | 255

Figure 12: Graphical comparison of MSSIM value (0.01 and 0.03 Level Gaussian noise)

4.5.4 Discussion

During the transmission and acquisition processes, noise is introduced in the digital images that effectively
degrades the quality of images. Therefore, an accurate recognition of noise level helps in improving the qual-
ity of images that is crucial in several real time applications like image retrieval, object detection, video
surveillance, biometric authentication, etc. In this research, modified fuzzy set filter is proposed to retain
edge information and also to remove noise for restoring the digital image. The efficacy of the modified fuzzy
set filter is shown in Table 5. The performance investigation is done by utilizing the performance metrics like
PSNR, MSSIM, SSIM, MSE, UIQI and NMSE. Under different Gaussian noise levels, the performance of the pro-
posed and existing filters are validated. From the experimental simulation, modified fuzzy set filter showed
2-3 dB enhancement in PSNR, 0.12-0.03 improvement in MSSIM value and 0.38-0.1 enhancement in NMSE
value compared to the prior filtering methods like mean filter, Wiener filter, TMED, ATMED, TMAV, AFF, NLM
filter and WGF. A few key benefits of modified fuzzy set filter are conceptually simple, more robust against
Gaussian noise and effectively preserves the fine structure of the image.

5 Conclusion
In digital image processing, the noisy digital images are harnessed to the intended operations, specifically
when the noise level is too high. To address this issue, many image denoising schemes are developed in sev-
eral applications like medical image analysis, biometric authentication, pattern recognition etc. for reducing
the noise level in a digital image. In this research paper, modified fuzzy set filter is proposed based on the ob-
jectives for improving the robustness and imperceptibility of underwater images. At first, the modified fuzzy
set filter was applied to the lower estimated underwater noise images. For checking the dynamic character-
istics of modified fuzzy set filter, various Gaussian noise levels are simulated on the underwater images and
results are evaluated. Related to other existing schemes, the modified fuzzy set filter delivers an effective
performance by means of PSNR, MSSIM, SSIM, MSE, UIQI and NMSE. The modified fuzzy set filter almost
achieved 2-3 dB enhancement in PSNR, 0.12-0.03 improvement in MSSIM value and 0.38-0.1 enhancement
in NMSE value compared to the prior methods. In future work, an efficient optimization algorithm will be
utilized to optimize the fuzzy rules for further improving the denoising performance.

References
[1] Y. Bai, Y. Liu, Q. Zhang, L. Jia, and Z. Gui, “Image denoising via an improved non-local total variation model”, The Journal of
Engineering, vol.2018, no.8, pp.745-752, 2018.
256 | A. Suneetha and E. Srinivasa Reddy

[2] H. Yue, X. Sun, J. Yang, and F. Wu, “Image denoising by exploring external and internal correlations”, IEEE Transactions on
Image Processing, vol.24, no.6, pp.1967-1982, 2015.
[3] Y. Zhang, J. Xiao, J. Peng, Y. Ding, J. Liu, Z. Guo, and X. Zong, “Kernel Wiener Filtering Model with Low-Rank Approximation for
Image Denoising”, Information Sciences, vol.462, pp.402-416,2018.
[4] J.L. de Paiva, C.F. Toledo, and H. Pedrini, “An approach based on hybrid genetic algorithm applied to image denoising
problem”, Applied Soft Computing, vol.46, pp.778-791, 2016.
[5] H. Hu, J. Froment, and Q. Liu, “A note on patch-based low-rank minimization for fast image denoising”, Journal of Visual
Communication and Image Representation, vol.50, pp.100-110, 2018.
[6] A. Siddig, Z. Guo, Z. Zhou, and B. Wu, “An image denoising model based on a fourth-order nonlinear partial differential
equation”, Computers & Mathematics with Applications, vol.76, no.5, pp.1056-1074, 2018.
[7] H.A. Jalab, and R.W. Ibrahim, “Fractional Alexander polynomials for image denoising”, Signal Processing, vol.107, pp.340-354.
2015.
[8] S. Yao, Y. Chang, X. Qin, Y. Zhang, and T. Zhang, “Principal component dictionary-based patch grouping for image denoising”,
Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, vol.50, pp.111-122, 2018.
[9] H. Ma, and Y. Nie, “An edge fusion scheme for image denoising based on anisotropic diffusion models”, Journal of Visual
Communication and Image Representation, vol.40, pp.406-417, 2016.
[10] Y. Shen, B. Han, and E. Braverman, “Adaptive frame-based color image denoising”, Applied and Computational Harmonic
Analysis, vol.41, no.1, pp.54-74, 2016.
[11] C. Elmas, R. Demirci, and U. GüVenc, “Fuzzy diffusion filter with extended neighborhood”, Expert Systems with Applications,
vol.40, no.3, pp.866-872, 2013.
[12] S. Schulte, V. De Witte, and E.E. Kerre, “A fuzzy noise reduction method for color images”, IEEE Transactions on image
Processing, vol.16, no.5, pp.1425-1436, 2007.
[13] G. Wang, H. Zhu, and Y. Wang, “Fuzzy decision filter for color images denoising”, Optik-International Journal for Light and
Electron Optics, vol.126, no.20, pp.2428-2432, 2015.
[14] V. Singh, R. Dev, N.K. Dhar, P. Agrawal, and N.K. Verma, “Adaptive Type-2 Fuzzy Approach for Filtering Salt and Pepper Noise
in Grayscale Images”, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, vol.26, no.5, pp.3170-3176, 2018.
[15] D. Van De Ville, M. Nachtegael, D. Van der Weken, E.E. Kerre, W. Philips, and I. Lemahieu, “Noise reduction by fuzzy image
filtering”, IEEE transactions on fuzzy systems, vol.11, no.4, pp.429-436, 2003.
[16] F. Ahmed, and S. Das, “Removal of High-Density Salt-and-Pepper Noise in Images With an Iterative Adaptive Fuzzy Filter
Using Alpha-Trimmed Mean”, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Systems, vol.22, no.5, pp.1352-1358, 2014.
[17] K.K.V. Toh, and N.A.M. Isa, “Noise adaptive fuzzy switching median filter for salt-and-pepper noise reduction”, IEEE signal
processing letters, vol.17, no.3, pp.281-284, 2010.
[18] X. Zhang, “Image denoising using local Wiener filter and its method noise”, Optik-International Journal for Light and Electron
Optics, vol.127, no.17, pp.6821-6828, 2016.
[19] J. Liu, Y. Wang, K. Su, and W. He, “Image denoising with multidirectional shrinkage in directionlet domain”, Signal Processing,
vol.125, pp.64-78, 2016.
[20] K. Panetta, L. Bao, and S. Agaian, “Sequence-to-sequence similarity-based filter for image denoising”, IEEE Sensors Journal,
vol.16, no.11, pp.4380-4388, 2016.
[21] H.K. Rafsanjani, M.H. Sedaaghi, and S. Saryazdi, “An adaptive diffusion coeflcient selection for image denoising”, Digital
Signal Processing, vol.64, pp.71-82, 2017.
[22] Q. Guo, C. Zhang, Y. Zhang, and H. Liu, “An eflcient SVD-based method for image denoising”, IEEE transactions on Circuits
and Systems for Video Technology, vol.26, no.5, pp.868-880, 2016.
[23] P. Fu, C. Li, W. Cai, and Q. Sun, “A spatially cohesive super pixel model for image noise level estimation”, Neurocomputing,
vol.266, pp.420-432, 2017.
[24] J. Bai, and X.C. Feng, “Image Denoising Using Generalized Anisotropic Diffusion”, Journal of Mathematical Imaging and
Vision, vol.60, no.7, pp.994-1007, 2018.
[25] R. Hao, and Z. Su, “A patch-based low-rank tensor approximation model for multiframe image denoising”, Journal of
Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol.329, pp.125-133, 2018.
[26] K.B. Khan, M. Shahid, H. Ullah, E. Rehman, and M.M. Khan, “Adaptive trimmed mean autoregressive model for reduction of
Poisson noise in scintigraphic images”, IIUM Engineering Journal, vol.19, no.2, pp.68-79, 2018.
[27] K.B. Khan, A.A. Khaliq, M. Shahid, and J.A. Shah, “A new approach of weighted gradient filter for denoising of medical images
in the presence of Poisson noise”, Tehnički vjesnik, vol.23, no.6, pp.1755-1762, 2016.
[28] F.S. Abdul-Sattar, A.A. Al-Zuky, and M.N. Baker, “Colour image noise reduction using fuzzy filtering”, Journal of Engineering
and Sustainable Development, vol.12, no.2, pp.157-166, 2008.
[29] S.K. Gangadharaiah, and H.N. Suresh, “Overlapped Semantic Age Group Estimation Using Hybrid PCA and Log Gabor Filter”,
International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, vol.11, no.2, pp.1-9, 2018.
[30] S. Shrestha, “Image denoising using new adaptive based median filters”, arXiv preprint arXiv:1410.2175, 2014.
[31] K. Muandet, B. Sriperumbudur, K. Fukumizu, A. Gretton, and B. Schölkopf, “Kernel mean shrinkage estimators”, The Journal
of Machine Learning Research, vol.17, no.1, pp.1656-1696, 2016.
 Robust Gaussian Noise Detection and Removal in Color Images using Modified Fuzzy Set Filter | 257

[32] A. Rehman, and Z. Wang, “SSIM-based non-local means image denoising”, In Image Processing (ICIP), 18th International
Conference on IEEE, pp. 217-220, 2011.
[33] K. Srividhya, and M.M. Ramya, “Fuzzy-based adaptive denoising of underwater images”, International Journal of Fuzzy
Systems, vol.19, no.4, pp.1132-1143, 2017.