4.2 Article

Atoms of All Channels, Unite! Average Case Analysis of Multi-Channel Sparse Recovery Using Greedy Algorithms

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOURIER ANALYSIS AND APPLICATIONS
Volume 14, Issue 5-6, Pages 655-687

Publisher

SPRINGER BIRKHAUSER
DOI: 10.1007/s00041-008-9044-y

Keywords

Greedy algorithms; OMP; Thresholding; Multi-channel; Average analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper provides new results on computing simultaneous sparse approximations of multichannel signals over redundant dictionaries using two greedy algorithms. The first one, p-thresholding, selects the S atoms that have the largest p-correlation while the second one, p-simultaneous matching pursuit (p-SOMP), is a generalisation of an algorithm studied by Tropp in (Signal Process. 86: 572-588, 2006). We first provide exact recovery conditions as well as worst case analyses of all algorithms. The results, expressed using the standard cumulative coherence, are very reminiscent of the single channel case and, in particular, impose stringent restrictions on the dictionary. We unlock the situation by performing an average case analysis of both algorithms. First, we set up a general probabilistic signal model in which the coefficients of the atoms are drawn at random from the standard Gaussian distribution. Second, we show that under this model, and with mild conditions on the coherence, the probability that p-thresholding and p-SOMP fail to recover the correct components is overwhelmingly small and gets smaller as the number of channels increases. Furthermore, we analyse the influence of selecting the set of correct atoms at random. We show that, if the dictionary satisfies a uniform uncertainty principle (Candes and Tao, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, 52(12):5406-5425, 2006), the probability that simultaneous OMP fails to recover any sufficiently sparse set of atoms gets increasingly smaller as the number of channels increases.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available