Abstract

Two-dimensional phase unwrapping is a critical processing procedure of synthetic aperture radar interferometry. This operation becomes even more difficult in the presence of noise. Both local and global unwrapping algorithms are used in obtaining the absolute phase from the wrapped ones. However, there are still gaps in the use of these methods. Local methods still let noise propagate. While the global methods are unable to properly formulate the objective function. The aim of this article is to present a new algorithm for interferometric phase unwrapping. An alternative method to consider both local and global constraints of the interferogram is proposed. Local constraints are modeled by a novel quality measure. A weight is then assigned to each pixel of the interferogram based on two criteria—the phase jump ratio and the phase gradient. While the global constraints are modeled by a cost function that calculates the sum of the pixels weights in the interferogram. This cost function is minimized by a genetic algorithm. Validation tests with real and simulated interferograms showed that the proposed algorithm outperforms standard algorithms of phase unwrapping such as branch cuts, minimum cost flow networks, or minimum $L^{p}$ -norm algorithm.

Highlights

  • SAR interferometry is an alternative method to photogrammetric or Lidar surveys for extracting Digital Surface and Terrain Models in urban areas

  • The structural similarity index (SSIM) value is between -1 and 1, a high SSIM means a great similarity between the two compared images

  • A new phase unwrapping algorithm is presented in this article

Read more

Summary

Introduction

SAR interferometry is an alternative method to photogrammetric or Lidar surveys for extracting Digital Surface and Terrain Models in urban areas. Methods that effectively exploit both local and global constraints, such as those based on Markov random fields, can improve phase unwrapping results [13, 14, 15, 16] Their strength lies in their ability to consider contextual information and the fact that they are only based on direct assumptions in the context of the pixel with its neighborhood. They do not need an exact probability distribution function of the observed phase and noise term. The choice of using the optimization method is not so obvious

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call