Sparse Reconstruction with Compressed Sensing: Difference between revisions

From Cornell University Computational Optimization Open Textbook - Optimization Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 187: Line 187:


=== Sensing Matrix ===
=== Sensing Matrix ===
Although the sensing matrix <math>A</math> satisfies RIP of order <math>k</math> in some situations, confirming a given matrix <math>A</math> meets RIP's criteria is NP-hard in general. As a result, designing an efficient sensing matrix is critical. These sensing matrices are responsible for signal compression at the encoder end and accurate or approximate reconstruction at the decoder end. For signal compression, different sensing matrices are utilized in compressed sensing. There are random, deterministic, structural, and optimized sensing matrices are used in compressed sensing [2020_book].
Although the sensing matrix <math>A</math> satisfies RIP of order <math>k</math> in some situations, confirming a given matrix <math>A</math> meets RIP's criteria is NP-hard in general. As a result, designing an efficient sensing matrix is critical. These sensing matrices are responsible for signal compression at the encoder end and accurate or approximate reconstruction at the decoder end. For signal compression, different sensing matrices are utilized in compressed sensing. There are random, deterministic, structural, and optimized sensing matrices are used in compressed sensing <ref name ="Parkale">.


* '''Random Sensing Matrices'''
* '''Random Sensing Matrices'''
Some classes of random matrices satisfy RIP, specifically those matrices with independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) entries drawn from a sub-Gaussian distribution. It requires the number of measurements, <math>M = O(k log(N/k))</math>, to recover <math>x</math> with high probability. Other popular random sensing matrices are Gaussian, Bernoulli, or Rademacher distributions. However, those random dense matrices incur tremendous computational and memory costs, making them unsuitable for large-scale applications. Several researchers have turned to sparse measurement matrices such as binary or bi-adjacency matrices rather than random matrices to address this issue. Nonetheless, those sparse matrices are unstructured in the same way that acyclic networks or trees are. Fortunately, the new random Weibull matrices [9] are built with appropriate observations and provide exact sparse signal reconstruction with a greater probability [2020_book].
Some classes of random matrices satisfy RIP, specifically those matrices with independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) entries drawn from a sub-Gaussian distribution. It requires the number of measurements, <math>M = O(k log(N/k))</math>, to recover <math>x</math> with high probability. Other popular random sensing matrices are Gaussian, Bernoulli, or Rademacher distributions. However, those random dense matrices incur tremendous computational and memory costs, making them unsuitable for large-scale applications. Several researchers have turned to sparse measurement matrices such as binary or bi-adjacency matrices rather than random matrices to address this issue. Nonetheless, those sparse matrices are unstructured in the same way that acyclic networks or trees are. Fortunately, the new random Weibull matrices [9] are built with appropriate observations and provide exact sparse signal reconstruction with a greater probability <ref name ="Parkale">.


* '''Deterministic Sensing Matrices'''
* '''Deterministic Sensing Matrices'''
Although deterministic sensing matrices are insufficient to satisfy the RIP condition, they can be used to provide instances for novel concepts. The Vandermond <math>k \times N</math> matrices are one of the best deterministic matrices for recovering the <math>k</math>-sparse signal; however, the reconstruction technique gets unstable as <math>N</math> rises. Despite the lack of RIP support in the deterministic sensing matrices, it successfully recovered the original sparse signal for the chirp function-based employing <math>M \times M^2</math> complex-valued deterministic matrices. According to the researchers Amini and Marvasti [13], binary, bipolar, and ternary matrices are deterministic constructions of sensing matrices that satisfy the RIP of order <math>k</math>. Because of the cyclic feature, the reconstruction process can be sped up using a fast Fourier transform (FFT) technique. Another type of deterministic CS sensing matrix is one based on mutual coherence. The finite geometry-based sparse binary matrices were constructed with low coherence [18,19]. The sparseness property of matrices aids in reducing storage requirements and improving the reconstruction process [2020_book].
Although deterministic sensing matrices are insufficient to satisfy the RIP condition, they can be used to provide instances for novel concepts. The Vandermond <math>k \times N</math> matrices are one of the best deterministic matrices for recovering the <math>k</math>-sparse signal; however, the reconstruction technique gets unstable as <math>N</math> rises. Despite the lack of RIP support in the deterministic sensing matrices, it successfully recovered the original sparse signal for the chirp function-based employing <math>M \times M^2</math> complex-valued deterministic matrices. According to the researchers Amini and Marvasti [13], binary, bipolar, and ternary matrices are deterministic constructions of sensing matrices that satisfy the RIP of order <math>k</math>. Because of the cyclic feature, the reconstruction process can be sped up using a fast Fourier transform (FFT) technique. Another type of deterministic CS sensing matrix is one based on mutual coherence. The finite geometry-based sparse binary matrices were constructed with low coherence [18,19]. The sparseness property of matrices aids in reducing storage requirements and improving the reconstruction process <ref name ="Parkale">.


* '''Structural Sensing Matrices'''
* '''Structural Sensing Matrices'''
Sensing technologies require structured measurement matrices to perform a variety of tasks. Those matrices can be easily created with a small number of parameters. Furthermore, structured matrices can be used to speed the recovery performance of algorithms, making these matrices suitable for big data challenges. Many researchers created Toeplitz and circulant random sensing matrices used in multipath sparse channel estimation and network systems. In terms of estimated accuracy, signal reconstruction speed, and coherence, these matrices perform similar to i.i.d. Gaussian satisfies RIP with high probability. The new sparse block circulant matrix (SBCM) structure greatly reduces computational complexity. Other structural sensing matrices include the Hadamard matrix, which provides near-optimal assurances of recovery while requiring less complexity and so allowing for simple hardware implementation [2020_book].
Sensing technologies require structured measurement matrices to perform a variety of tasks. Those matrices can be easily created with a small number of parameters. Furthermore, structured matrices can be used to speed the recovery performance of algorithms, making these matrices suitable for big data challenges. Many researchers created Toeplitz and circulant random sensing matrices used in multipath sparse channel estimation and network systems. In terms of estimated accuracy, signal reconstruction speed, and coherence, these matrices perform similar to i.i.d. Gaussian satisfies RIP with high probability. The new sparse block circulant matrix (SBCM) structure greatly reduces computational complexity. Other structural sensing matrices include the Hadamard matrix, which provides near-optimal assurances of recovery while requiring less complexity and so allowing for simple hardware implementation <ref name ="Parkale">.


* '''Optimized Sensing Matrices'''
* '''Optimized Sensing Matrices'''
In order to accomplish high-quality signal reconstruction, the sensing matrices must satisfy RIP. Regardless of what might be expected, the RIP is difficult to verify. Another method for validating the RIP is to compute the mutual coherence between the sensing matrix and the sparse matrix or figure the Gram matrix as <math>G = A^{T} A \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}</math>. The objective is to improve the sensing matrix to lower coherence using numerous strategies such as the random-detecting framework-based improvement strategy using the shrinkage technique and the irregular estimation of sensing matrix improvement employing a symmetrical strategy. Another technique is to optimize the sensing matrix using a block-sparsified dictionary approach, decreasing the total inter-block and sub-block coherence of the dictionary matrix and thereby significantly increasing the reconstruction [2020_book]
In order to accomplish high-quality signal reconstruction, the sensing matrices must satisfy RIP. Regardless of what might be expected, the RIP is difficult to verify. Another method for validating the RIP is to compute the mutual coherence between the sensing matrix and the sparse matrix or figure the Gram matrix as <math>G = A^{T} A \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}</math>. The objective is to improve the sensing matrix to lower coherence using numerous strategies such as the random-detecting framework-based improvement strategy using the shrinkage technique and the irregular estimation of sensing matrix improvement employing a symmetrical strategy. Another technique is to optimize the sensing matrix using a block-sparsified dictionary approach, decreasing the total inter-block and sub-block coherence of the dictionary matrix and thereby significantly increasing the reconstruction <ref name ="Parkale">





Revision as of 17:55, 20 December 2021

Author: Ngoc Ly (SysEn 5800 Fall 2021)

Introduction

sub module goal

The goal of compressed sensing is to solve the underdetermined linear system in which the number of variables is much greater than the number of observations, resulting in an infinite number of signal coefficient vectors for the same set of compressive measurements . The objective is to reconstruct a vector in a given of measurements and a sensing matrix A. Instead of taking a large number of high-resolution measurements and discarding the majority of them, consider taking far fewer random measurements and reconstructing the original with high probability from its sparse representation.

sub modual

Begin with a linear equation , where is a sensing matrix that must be obtained and will result in either exact or approximated optimum solution depending on how it is chosen, is a signal vector with at most -sparse entries, which means has non-zero entries, be an index set, is a compressed measurement vector, , is a noise vector and assumed to be bounded if it exists, and .


sub module sparsity

A vector is said to be -sparse in if it has at most nonzero coefficients. The support of is , and is a -sparse signal when the cardinality . The set of -sparse vectors is denoted by . Consequently, there are different subsets of -sparse vectors. If a random -sparse is drawn uniformly from , its entropy is approximately equivalent to bits are required for compression of ~cite(Measurements vs Bits).


The idea is to search for the sparsest from the measurement vector and a sensing matrix with . If the number of linear measurements is at least twice as its sparsity , i.e., , then there exists at most one signal that satisfies the constraint and produce the correct result for any [coluccia2015 book7]. Hence, the reconstruction problem can be formulated as an "norm" program.

This optimization problem minimizes the number of nonzero entries of subject to the constraint , that is to find the sparsest element in the affine space [2019 book33]. It turns out to be a combinatorial optimization problem, which is NP-Hard because it includes all possible sets of -sparse out of . Furthermore, if noise is present, the recovery is unstable [Buraniuk "compressed sensing"].

Restricted Isometry Property (RIP)

A matrix is said to satisfy the RIP of order if for all has a . A restricted isometry constant (RIC) of is the smallest satisfying this condition [2019 book38, coluccia2015 book7].

Under projections through matrix , the restricted isometry property allows -sparse vectors to have unique measurement vectors . If meets RIP, then does not send two distinct -sparse to the same measurement vector , indicating that is a unique solution under RIP.


If the matrix satisfies the RIP condition of order and the constant , there are two distinct -sparse vectors in . When they are equal, the restricted isometry property holds. If is a -order RIP matrix, it means that no two -sparse vectors are mapped to the same measurement vector by . In other words, when working with sparse vectors, the RIP ensures that the columns of are nearly orthonormal. Furthermore, is an approximately norm-preserving function, which means that it preserves its distance when mapping for -sparse signals for all or more as approaches zero. [Candes, Romberg, Tao[4]] demonstrate that if is -sparse, and satisfies the RIP of order with RIP-constant , then gives a unique sparse solution. The convex optimization problem is the same as the solution to the program and can solve by the Linear Program [2019 book38, coluccia2015 book7]. Hence, the reconstruction problem is as followed which can be solved by basis pursuit.


Theory

Two main things need to be considered when recovering

  • (1) The design of the sensing matrix
  • (2) The recovery algorithm

Sensing Matrix

Although the sensing matrix satisfies RIP of order in some situations, confirming a given matrix meets RIP's criteria is NP-hard in general. As a result, designing an efficient sensing matrix is critical. These sensing matrices are responsible for signal compression at the encoder end and accurate or approximate reconstruction at the decoder end. For signal compression, different sensing matrices are utilized in compressed sensing. There are random, deterministic, structural, and optimized sensing matrices are used in compressed sensing Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]


[6]

Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag

Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]


  1. E. J. Candès and T. Tao, “Decoding by linear programming,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 51, no. 12, Art. no. 12, 2005, doi: 10.1109/TIT.2005.858979.
  2. D. L. Donoho, “Compressed sensing,” vol. 52, pp. 1289–1306, 2006, doi: 10.1109/tit.2006.871582.
  3. T. Blumensath and M. E. Davies, “Iterative Hard Thresholding for Compressed Sensing,” May 2008.
  4. S. Foucart and H. Rauhut, A mathematical introduction to compressive sensing. New York [u.a.]: Birkhäuser, 2013.
  5. R. G. Baraniuk, “Compressive Sensing [Lecture Notes],” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 24, no. 4, Art. no. 4, 2007, doi: 10.1109/MSP.2007.4286571.
  6. 2. Emmanuel J. Candès and Terence Tao. Decoding by linear programming. IEEE
  7. 12. E. J. Candes, J. Romberg, and T. Tao. Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information. 52:489–509, 2006.
  8. 17. Mohammed Rostami. Compressed sensing with side information on feasible re- gion, 2013.
  9. 23. Laska Jason Noah. Rice university regime change: Sampling rate vs. bit-depth in compressive sensing, 2011.
  10. 33. Richard G. Baraniuk. Compressive sensing [lecture notes]. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 24(4):118–121, 2007.
  11. 30. Richard Baraniuk, Mark Davenport, Ronald DeVore, and Michael Wakin. A simple proof of the restricted isometry property for random matrices. 28:253–263, 2008.
  12. 40. Emmanuel Candes, Justin Romberg, and Terence Tao. Stable signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate measurements. March 2005.
  13. 1348. Niklas Koep, Arash Behboodi, and Rudolf Mathar. An introduction to compressed sensing, 2019.
  14. 49. Martin Burger, Janic Föcke, Lukas Nickel, Peter Jung, and Sven Augustin. Recon- struction methods in thz single-pixel imaging, 2019.
  15. 50. J. K. Pillai, V. M. Patel, R. Chellappa, and N. K. Ratha. Secure and robust iris recognition using random projections and sparse representations. 33:1877–1893, 2011.
  16. Y. V. Parkale and S. L. Nalbalwar, “Sensing Matrices in Compressed Sensing.” pp. 113–123, 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-981-32-9515-5_11.