4.7 Article

Sparse Recovery Conditions and Performance Bounds for l(p)-Minimization

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SIGNAL PROCESSING
Volume 66, Issue 19, Pages 5014-5028

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TSP.2018.2862402

Keywords

Compressed sensing; non-convex sparse recovery; null space property; restricted isometry property; l(p) pseudo norm

Funding

  1. NSFC/RGC Joint Research Scheme - National Natural Science Foundation of China
  2. Research Grants Council of Hong Kong [61531166005, N_CityU 104/15]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61571263]
  4. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFE0201900, 2017YFC0403600]
  5. Tsinghua University Initiative Scientific Research Program [2014Z01005]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In sparse recovery, a sparse signal x is an element of R-N with K nonzero entries is to be reconstructed from a compressed measurement y = Ax with A is an element of R-M x N (M < N). The l(p) (0 <= p < 1) pseudonorm has been found to be a sparsity inducing function superior to the l(1) norm, and the null space constant (NSC) and restricted isometry constant (RIC) have been used as key notions in the performance analyses of the corresponding l(p)-minimization. In this paper, we study sparse recovery conditions and performance hounds for the l(p)-minimization. We devise a new NSC upper bound that outperforms the state-of-the-art result. Based on the improved NSC upper bound, we provide a new RIC upper bound dependent on the sparsity level K as a sufficient condition for precise recovery, and it is tighter than the existing bound for small K. Then, we study the largest choice of p for the l(p)-minimization problem to recover any K-sparse signal, and the largest recoverable K for a fixed p. Numerical experiments demonstrate the improvement of the proposed bounds in the recovery conditions over the up-to-date counterparts.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available