approximation algorithms for model-based compressive sensingyuejiec/ece18898g_notes/... ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Approximation Algorithms for Model-Based Compressive
SensingJaron Chen
Agenda
• Motivation
• Introduction to Approximate Model Algorithms
• Mathematical Background
• Approximate Model Iterative Hard Thresholding
• Approximate Model Compressive Sampling Matching Pursuit
• Improved Recovery via Boosting
• Summary
Motivation
Compressive sensing allows for a sparse signal to be recovered from a limited number of measurements
Model-based compressive sensing uses the structure of the signal to recover the signal with even fewer measurements
Motivation: Robust Sparse Recovery
𝐴 is an m-by-n matrix.
𝑥 is the original n-dimensional k-sparse signal.
𝑒 is the noise vector.𝑦 = 𝐴𝑥 + 𝑒
𝑥 − ො𝑥 2 ≤ 𝐶 𝑒 2
where 𝐶 is the constant approximation factor.
The number of measurements needed: m = 𝑂 𝑘 logn
𝑘.
Large n can cause m to be very large.
Introduction to Approximate Model Algorithms
Approximation-Tolerant Model-Based Compressive Sensing.Using careful signal modeling can overcome this limitation. One way is through a method known as approximation-tolerant model-based compressive sensing. This framework includes sparse-recovery algorithms that only require approximate solutions.
This can reduce the number of measurements needed to recover thesignal.
Mathematical Background
Mathematical Definitions
Let [n] denote the set {1,2,…,n} and Ω ⊆ [n].
(𝑥Ω) 𝑖 = ቊ𝑥𝑖 , 𝑖 ∈ Ω0, otherwise
For a matrix 𝐴 ∈ ℝm×n,
𝐴Ω is the submatrix with the columns corresponding to Ω (𝐴Ω ∈ ℝm× Ω ).
Structured Sparsity Model
Let the structured sparsity model 𝑀 ⊆ ℝn, which is the set of vectors 𝓜= {𝑥 ∈ ℝn | supp 𝑥 ⊆ S for some S ∈𝕄}, where𝕄= Ω1, … , Ω𝑙and 𝑙 is the size of 𝓜.
Let 𝕄+ = {Ω ⊆[n]| Ω ⊆ 𝑆 for some 𝑆 ∈ 𝕄}
Therefore, the set of vectors 𝓜= {𝑥 ∈ ℝn | supp 𝑥 ∈ 𝕄+}
Model Restricted Isometry Property
The matrix 𝐴 ∈ ℝm×n satisfies the (𝛿, 𝕄)-model-RIP if this equality holds for all 𝑥 with supp(𝑥) ∈ 𝕄+.
1 − 𝛿 𝑥 22 ≤ 𝐴𝑥 2
2 ≤ 1 + 𝛿 𝑥 22
Let 𝐴 ∈ ℝm×n satisfy the RIP. Let Ω ∈ 𝕄+, 𝑥 ∈ ℝn, and y ∈ℝm. The following properties will hold:
𝐴Ω𝑇𝑦
2≤ 1 + 𝛿 𝑦 2
𝐴Ω𝑇𝐴Ω𝑥 2
≤ 1 + 𝛿 𝑥 2
(𝐼 − 𝐴Ω𝑇𝐴Ω)𝑥 2
≤ 1 + 𝛿 𝑥 2
Model-projection oracle
Model-projection oracle is a function 𝑀: ℝn ⟶ Ƥ n that follows the output model sparsity and optimal model projection properties.
Output model sparsity: 𝑀 𝑥 ∈ 𝕄+.
Optimal model projection:
Let Ω′ = 𝑀 𝑥 . Then, 𝑥 − 𝑥Ω′ 2 = minΩ∈𝕄 𝑥 − 𝑥Ω 2.
Model Iterative Hard Thresholding
One of the most popular algorithms for sparse recovery is iterative hard thresholding (IHT). This can be modified to apply to the model 𝓜.
𝑥𝑖+1← 𝑀 𝑥𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇 𝑦 − 𝐴𝑥𝑖
where 𝑥1, the initial signal estimate, is 0. This is executed until convergence.
Measurement Bound
Let k=max𝛺∈𝕄 Ω and 0 < 𝛿 < 1.
There must be a constant c such that m≥𝑐
𝛿2𝑘 log
1
𝛿+ log 𝕄 + 𝑡
for any 𝑡 > 0.
m= 𝑂 𝑘 + log 𝕄 = 𝑂(𝑘)
Incorrect Approach
For structured sparsity models, computing the optimal model-projection can be difficult. This can be simplified by using approximate model-projection oracles.
In a standard compressive sensing setting, the model consists of the set of all 𝑘-sparse signals. Thus, the oracle T𝑘 ∙ returns the 𝑘 coefficients with the largest magnitude of 𝑥.
Let c be an arbitrary constant and 𝑇𝑘′ be a projection oracle such that
for any 𝑎 ∈ ℝ:𝑎 − 𝑇𝑘
′ 𝑎 2 ≤ 𝑐 𝑎 − 𝑇𝑘(𝑎)
Incorrect Approach
Adapting this to the Model-IHT,
𝑥𝑖+1← 𝑇𝑘′ 𝑥𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇 𝑦 − 𝐴𝑥𝑖
where the first iteration is 𝑥1 ← 𝑇𝑘′ 𝐴𝑇𝑦
Why is this approach incorrect?
Consider a 1-sparse signal 𝑥 with 𝑥1 = 1 and 𝑥𝑖 = 0 for 𝑖 ≠ 1 and a
matrix 𝐴 with 𝛿, 𝑂 1 -RIP for small 𝛿.
𝑥𝑖+1← 𝑇𝑘′ 𝑥𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇 𝑦 − 𝐴𝑥𝑖
𝑥1 = 𝑥0 = 0
Algorithms Assumptions
The algorithms use two projection oracles. Given 𝑥 ∈ ℝn, a tail approximation oracle returns a support Ω𝑡 in the model such that the norm of the tail 𝑥 − 𝑥Ω𝑡 2
is approximately minimized. A head
approximation oracle returns a support Ωℎ in the model such that the norm of the tail 𝑥Ω𝑡 2
is approximately minimized.
Approximate Oracles
Head Approximation Oracle
Let 𝕄,𝕄𝐻 ⊆ Ƥ n , 𝑝 ≥ 1, and 𝑐𝐻 ∈ ℝ.
𝐻: ℝn ⟶ Ƥ n is a 𝑐𝐻 , 𝕄,𝕄𝐻 , 𝑝 -head approximation oracle if output model sparsity and optimal model projection properties hold.
Output model sparsity: 𝐻 𝑥 ∈ 𝕄𝐻+ .
Head approximation:
Let Ω′ = 𝐻 𝑥 . Then, 𝑥Ω′ 𝑝 ≥ 𝑐𝐻 𝑥Ω 𝑝 for all Ω∈𝕄.
Approximation Oracles
Tail Approximation Oracle
Let 𝕄,𝕄𝑇 ⊆ Ƥ n , 𝑝 ≥ 1, and 𝑐𝑇 ∈ ℝ.
𝑇: ℝn ⟶ Ƥ n is a 𝑐𝑇 , 𝕄,𝕄𝑇 , 𝑝 -tail approximation oracle if output model sparsity and optimal model projection properties hold.
Output model sparsity: 𝑇 𝑥 ∈ 𝕄𝑇+.
Tail approximation:
Let Ω′ = 𝑇 𝑥 . Then, 𝑥 − 𝑥Ω′ 𝑝 ≥ 𝑐𝑇 𝑥 − 𝑥Ω 𝑝 for all Ω∈𝕄.
Approximate Algorithms
Approximate Model Iterative Hard Thresholding
Approximate Model-IHT Algorithm
Assumptions on Algorithm
1. 𝑥 ∈ ℝn and 𝑥 ∈𝓜
2. 𝑦 = 𝐴𝑥 + 𝑒 for 𝑒 ∈ ℝm
3. 𝑇 is a 𝑐𝑇 , 𝕄,𝕄𝑇 , 2 -tail approximation oracle.
4. 𝐻 is a 𝑐𝐻 ,𝕄𝑇 ⊕𝕄,𝕄𝐻 , 2 -head approximation oracle.
5. A has the (𝛿, 𝕄⊕𝕄𝑇⊕𝕄𝐻)-model RIP.
Let the sum ℂ = 𝔸⊕𝔹 = Ω + Γ |Ω ∈ 𝔸 and Γ ∈ 𝔹
Model-RIP on relevant vectors
Let 𝑟𝑖 = 𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖, Ω = supp 𝑟𝑖 , and Γ = supp(𝐻 𝑏𝑖 ). For all 𝑥′ ∈ℝn with supp(𝑥′) ⊆ Ω⋃𝑇,
1 − 𝛿 𝑥′ 22 ≤ 𝐴𝑥′ 2
2 ≤ 1 + 𝛿 𝑥 22
Proof: Because supp 𝑥𝑖 ∈ 𝕄𝑇 and supp(𝑥) ∈ 𝕄, supp 𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖 ∈
𝕄𝑇⊕𝕄, and therefore, Ω ∈ 𝕄𝑇⊕𝕄. supp 𝐻 𝑏𝑖 ∈ 𝕄𝐻 , so Ω⋃Γ ∈
𝕄⊕𝕄𝑇⊕𝕄𝐻, which allows model-RIP to be performed.
Geometric Convergence
Let 𝑟𝑖 = 𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖 where 𝑥𝑖 is the signal estimate at iteration 𝑖.𝑟𝑖+1
2≤ 𝛼 𝑟𝑖
2+ 𝛽 𝑒 2
where α = 1 + 𝑐𝑇 𝛿 + 1 − 𝛼02 ,
𝛽 = 1 + 𝑐𝑇𝛽0
𝛼0+
𝛼0𝛽0
1−𝛼02+ 1 + 𝛿 ,
𝛼0= 𝑐𝐻 1 − 𝛿 − 𝛿 and 𝛽0 = (1 + 𝑐𝐻) 1 + 𝛿
Proof of Geometric Convergence
𝑎 = 𝑥𝑖 + 𝐻 𝑏𝑖
Using the triangle inequality,
𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖+12= 𝑥 − 𝑇 𝑎 2
≤ 𝑥 − 𝑎 2 + 𝑎 − 𝑇 𝑎 2
≤ 1 + 𝑐𝑇 𝑥 − 𝑎 2
= 1 + 𝑐𝑇 𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖 − 𝐻(𝑏𝑖)2
= 1 + 𝑐𝑇 𝑟𝑖 − 𝐻(𝐴𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇𝑒)2
Lemma Proof
Let Ω = supp 𝑟𝑖 and Γ = supp(𝐻 𝑏𝑖 ).
𝑟Γ𝑐𝑖 ≤ 1 − 𝛼0
2 𝑟𝑖2+
𝛽0𝛼0
+𝛼0𝛽0
1 − 𝛼02
𝑒 2
where 𝛼0 = 𝑐𝐻 1 − 𝛿 − 𝛿 and 𝛽0 = (1 + 𝑐𝐻) 1 + 𝛿
Lemma Proof: Lower Bound on 𝑏Γ𝑖
2
𝑏𝑖= 𝐴𝑇 𝑦 − 𝐴𝑥𝑖 = 𝐴𝑇𝐴𝑥𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇𝑒
Using the head-approximation and triangle inequality properties,
𝑏Γ𝑖
2= 𝐴Γ
𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴Γ𝑇𝑒
2
≥ 𝑐𝐻 𝐴Ω𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴Ω
𝑇 𝑒2
≥ 𝑐𝐻 𝐴Ω𝑇𝐴Ω𝑟
𝑖2− 𝑐𝐻 𝐴Ω
𝑇 𝑒2
≥ 𝑐𝐻 1 − 𝛿 𝑟𝑖2− 𝑐𝐻 1 + 𝛿 𝑒 2
Lemma Proof: Upper Bound on 𝑏Γ𝑖
2
𝑏𝑖= 𝐴𝑇 𝑦 − 𝐴𝑥𝑖 = 𝐴𝑇𝐴𝑥𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇𝑒
Using the triangle inequality property and restricted isometry property,
𝑏Γ𝑖
2= 𝐴Γ
𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴Γ𝑇𝑒
2= 𝐴Γ
𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 − 𝑟Г𝑖 + 𝑟Г
𝑖 + 𝐴Γ𝑇𝑒
2
≤ 𝐴Γ𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 − 𝑟Г
𝑖2+ 𝑟Г
𝑖2+ 𝐴Γ
𝑇𝑒2
≤ 𝐴Γ⋃Ω𝑇 𝐴𝑟𝑖 − 𝑟Γ⋃Ω
𝑖2+ 𝑟Г
𝑖2+ 1 + 𝛿 𝑒 2
≤ 𝛿 𝑟𝑖2+ 𝑟Г
𝑖2+ 1 + 𝛿 𝑒 2
Lemma Proof
Combining the lower and upper bounds on 𝑏Γ𝑖
2,
𝑟Γ𝑖 ≥ 𝛼0 𝑟𝑖
2− 𝛽0 𝑒 2
where 𝛼0 = 𝑐𝐻 1 − 𝛿 − 𝛿 and 𝛽0 = (1 + 𝑐𝐻) 1 + 𝛿
Lemma Proof: Case 1
If 𝛼0 𝑟𝑖2≤ 𝛽0 𝑒 2,
𝑟Γ𝑐𝑖
2≤𝛽0𝛼0
𝑒 2
because 𝑟𝑖2> 𝑟Γ𝑐
𝑖
2.
Lemma Proof: Case 2
If 𝛼0 𝑟𝑖2≥ 𝛽0 𝑒 2,
𝑟Γ𝑖
2≥ 𝑟𝑖
2𝛼0 − 𝛽0
𝑒 2
𝑟𝑖 2
Knowing 𝑟𝑖2= 𝑟Г
𝑖
2+ 𝑟Γ𝑐
𝑖
2,
𝑟Γ𝑐𝑖
2≤ 𝑟𝑖
21 − 𝛼0 − 𝛽0
𝑒 2
𝑟𝑖 2
2
Lemma Proof: Case 2 (continued)
The 1 − 𝛼0 − 𝛽0𝑒 2
𝑟𝑖2
2
term can be reduced.
𝜔0 = 𝛼0 − 𝛽0𝑒 2
𝑟𝑖 2
𝜔0 < 1 because 𝛼0 𝑟𝑖2≥ 𝛽0 𝑒 2, 𝛼0 < 1, and 𝛽0 ≥ 1.
If 0 < 𝜔 < 1,
1 − 𝜔02 ≤
1
1 − 𝜔2−
𝜔
1 − 𝜔2𝜔0
Lemma Proof: Case 2 (continued)
𝑟Γ𝑐𝑖
2≤ 𝑟𝑖
2
1
1 − 𝜔2−
𝜔
1 − 𝜔2𝛼0 − 𝛽0
𝑒 2
𝑟𝑖 2
1 − 𝜔𝛼0
1 − 𝜔2𝑟𝑖
2+
𝜔𝛽0
1 − 𝜔2𝑒 2
1−𝜔𝛼0
1−𝜔2determines the convergence rate, and this is minimized if 𝜔 = 𝛼0.
𝑟Γ𝑐𝑖
2≤ 1 − 𝛼0
2 𝑟𝑖2+
𝛼0𝛽0
1 − 𝛼02
𝑒 2
Lemma Proof (continued)
Combining the results from cases 1 and 2,
𝑟Γ𝑐𝑖 ≤ 1 − 𝛼0
2 𝑟𝑖2+
𝛽0𝛼0
+𝛼0𝛽0
1 − 𝛼02
𝑒 2
Proof of Geometric Convergence (continued)
𝑟𝑖 − 𝐻(𝐴𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇𝑒)2
can be bounded.
Let Ω = supp 𝑟𝑖 and Γ = supp 𝐻 𝐴𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇𝑒 .
𝑟𝑖 −𝐻(𝐴𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇𝑒)2= 𝑟Γ
𝑖 + 𝑟Γ𝑐𝑖 − 𝐴Γ
𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴Γ𝑇𝑒
2
≤ 𝐴Γ𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 − 𝑟Γ
𝑖2+ 𝑟Γ𝑐
𝑖
2+ 𝐴Γ
𝑇𝑒2
≤ 𝐴Γ⋃Ω𝑇 𝐴𝑟𝑖𝑟Γ⋃Ω
𝑖2+ 𝑟Γ𝑐
𝑖
2+ 𝐴Γ
𝑇𝑒2
≤ 𝛿 𝑟𝑖2+ 1 − 𝛼0
2 𝑟𝑖2+
𝛽0
𝛼0+
𝛼0𝛽0
1−𝛼02+ 1 + 𝛿 𝑒 2
Proof of Geometric Convergence (continued)
𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖+12= 1 + 𝑐𝑇 𝑟𝑖 − 𝐻(𝐴𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇𝑒)
2
Combining RIP, lemma, and bound on 𝑟𝑖 −𝐻(𝐴𝑇𝐴𝑟𝑖 + 𝐴𝑇𝑒)2
,
𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖+12≤ 𝛼 𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖
2+ 𝛽 𝑒 2
where α = 1 + 𝑐𝑇 𝛿 + 1 − 𝛼02 and
𝛽 = 1 + 𝑐𝑇𝛽0
𝛼0+
𝛼0𝛽0
1−𝛼02+ 1 + 𝛿
This means AM-IHT exhibits robust signal recovery.
Geometric Converge in Noiseless Case
In the noiseless case,
𝛼 = (1 + 𝑐𝑇) 𝛿 + 1 − 𝑐𝐻 1 − 𝛿 − 𝛿 2
For convergence, 𝛼 < 1. Assume 𝛿 is very small. In order for AM-IHT to converge,
𝛼 ≈ 1 + 𝑐𝑇 1 − 𝑐𝐻2 < 1
𝑐𝐻2 > 1 −
1
1 + 𝑐𝑇2
AM-IHT achieves geometric convergence comparable to other model-based compressive sensing methods.
Approximate Model-IHT Algorithm
Approximate Model Compressive Sampling Matching
Pursuit
Approximate Model-CoSaMP
This algorithm for model-based compressive sensing with approximate projection oracles focuses on recovering signals from structured sparsity models.
Algorithm
Assumptions on Algorithm
1. 𝑥 ∈ ℝn and 𝑥 ∈𝓜
2. 𝑦 = 𝐴𝑥 + 𝑒 for 𝑒 ∈ ℝm
3. 𝑇 is a 𝑐𝑇 , 𝕄,𝕄𝑇 , 2 -tail approximation oracle.
4. 𝐻 is a 𝑐𝐻 ,𝕄𝑇 ⊕𝕄,𝕄𝐻 , 2 -head approximation oracle.
5. A has the (𝛿, 𝕄⊕𝕄𝑇⊕𝕄𝐻)-model RIP.
Geometric convergence of AM-CoSaMP
Let 𝑟𝑖 = 𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖 where 𝑥𝑖 is the signal estimate at iteration 𝑖.𝑟𝑖+1
2≤ 𝛼 𝑟𝑖
2+ 𝛽 𝑒 2
where α = 1 + 𝑐𝑇1+𝛿
1−𝛿1 − 𝛼0
2 ,
𝛽 = 1 + 𝑐𝑇1+𝛿
1−𝛿
𝛽0
𝛼0+
𝛼0𝛽0
1−𝛼02
+2
1−𝛿,
𝛼0= 𝑐𝐻 1 − 𝛿 − 𝛿 and 𝛽0 = (1 + 𝑐𝐻) 1 + 𝛿
Geometric Convergence Proof
Using triangle equality, tail approximation, and RIP,
𝑟𝑖+12= 𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖+1
2
≤ 𝑥𝑖+1 − 𝑧2+ 𝑥 − 𝑧 2
≤ 𝑐𝑇 𝑥 − 𝑧 2 + 𝑥 − 𝑧 2
= (1 + 𝑐𝑇) 𝑥 − 𝑧 2
≤ (1 + 𝑐𝑇)𝐴 𝑥−𝑧 2
1−𝛿
= (1 + 𝑐𝑇)𝐴𝑥−𝐴𝑧 2
1−𝛿
Geometric Convergence Proof (continued)
Because 𝐴𝑥 = 𝑦 − 𝑒 and 𝐴𝑧 = 𝐴𝑆𝑧𝑆,
𝑟𝑖+12≤ 1 + 𝑐𝑇
𝑦−𝐴𝑆𝑧𝑆 2
1−𝛿+
𝑒 2
1−𝛿
≤ (1 + 𝑐𝑇)𝑦−𝐴𝑆𝑥𝑆 2
1−𝛿+
𝑒 2
1−𝛿
Geometric Convergence Proof (continued)
𝑦 = 𝐴𝑥 + 𝑒 = 𝐴𝑆𝑥𝑆 + 𝐴𝑆𝑐𝑥𝑆𝑐 + 𝑒
𝑟𝑖+12≤ 1 + 𝑐𝑇
𝐴𝑆𝑐𝑥𝑆𝑐 2
1−𝛿+ 1 + 𝑐𝑇
2 𝑒 2
1−𝛿
≤ 1 + 𝑐𝑇1+𝛿
1−𝛿𝑥𝑆𝑐 2 + 1 + 𝑐𝑇
2 𝑒 2
1−𝛿
= 1 + 𝑐𝑇1+𝛿
1−𝛿𝑥 − 𝑥𝑖
𝑆𝑐 2+ 1 + 𝑐𝑇
2 𝑒 2
1−𝛿
≤ 1 + 𝑐𝑇1+𝛿
1−𝛿𝑟Γ𝑐𝑖
2+ 1 + 𝑐𝑇
2 𝑒 2
1−𝛿
Geometric Convergence Proof (continued)
𝑟𝑖+12≤ 𝛼 𝑟𝑖
2+ 𝛽 𝑒 2
where α = 1 + 𝑐𝑇1+𝛿
1−𝛿1 − 𝛼0
2 ,
𝛽 = 1 + 𝑐𝑇1+𝛿
1−𝛿
𝛽0
𝛼0+
𝛼0𝛽0
1−𝛼02
+2
1−𝛿,
𝛼0= 𝑐𝐻 1 − 𝛿 − 𝛿 and 𝛽0 = (1 + 𝑐𝐻) 1 + 𝛿
This means AM-CoSaMP exhibits robust signal recovery.
Geometric Converge in Noiseless Case
Assume 𝑒 = 0 and 𝛿 is very small.For convergence, 𝛼 < 1. Assume 𝛿 is very small. In order for AM-CoSaMP to converge,
𝛼 ≈ 1 + 𝑐𝑇 1 − 𝑐𝐻2 < 1
𝑐𝐻2 > 1 −
1
1 + 𝑐𝑇2
This is identical to the convergence of AM-IHT.
Algorithm
Improved Recovery via Boosting
Why do these algorithms need to be boosted?
By definition, 𝑐𝑇 ≥ 1, and thus 𝑐𝐻 ≥3
2. If 𝑐𝑇 is very large, this means
the tail-approximation oracle can only give a crude approximation. This forces 𝑐𝐻 to have to be very accurate, which can constrain the choice of approximation algorithms.
Boosting Algorithm
Theorem
Let 𝐻 be a 𝑐𝐻 ,𝕄,𝕄𝐻 , 𝑝 -head-approximation algorithm with 0 <
𝑐𝐻 ≤ 1 and 𝑝 ≥ 1. Then, BoostHead(𝑥, 𝐻, 𝑡) is a ( 1 − 1 − 𝑐𝐻𝑝 𝑡
1
𝑝,
𝕄,𝕄𝐻 , 𝑝)-head-approximation algorithm. BoostHead runs in time 𝑂 𝑡𝑇𝐻 , where 𝑇𝐻 is the time complexity of 𝐻.
Main Result
Let 𝑇 and 𝐻 be approximate projection oracles with 𝑐𝑇 ≥ 1 and 0 < 𝑐𝐻 < 1.
𝛾 =
1 −1
1 + 𝑐𝑇− 𝛿
2
+ 𝛿
1 − 𝛿
𝑡 =log(1 − 𝛾2)
log(1 − 𝑐𝐻2)
+ 1
If using AM-IHT with 𝑇 and BoostHead(𝑥, 𝐻, 𝑡) as projection oracles, the signal estimate will satisfy
𝑥 − ො𝑥 2 ≤ 𝐶 𝑒 2where ො𝑥 is the returned signal estimate.
Summary
Approximate Model-Based Algorithms
-AM-IHT
-AM-CoSaMP
Relaxation of Requirements via Boosting
Other research
Using model-based CoSaMP, the amount of LIDAR sensors needed can be reduced by as much as 85%.[2]
References
[1] Chinmay Hegde,Piotr Indyk,and Ludwig Schmidt. Approximation algorithms for model-based compressive sensing. Information Theory, IEEE Transactions, 61(9):5129–5147, 2015.
[2] A. Kadambi and P. T. Boufounos. Coded aperture compressive 3-d lidar. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 1166–1170, April 2015.