4.7 Article

Hankel Matrix Nuclear Norm Regularized Tensor Completion for N-dimensional Exponential Signals

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SIGNAL PROCESSING
卷 65, 期 14, 页码 3702-3717

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TSP.2017.2695566

关键词

Tensor completion; exponential signal; Hankel matrix; low rank; spectroscopy; NMR

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61571380, U1632274, 61672335, 61601276, 61302174, 11375147]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province of China [2015J01346, 2016J05205]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [20720150109]
  4. Hong Kong Research Grant Council [16300616]
  5. Important Joint Research Project on Major Diseases of Xiamen City [3502Z20149032]
  6. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB08030302]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Signals are generally modeled as a superposition of exponential functions in spectroscopy of chemistry, biology, and medical imaging. For fast data acquisition or other inevitable reasons, however, only a small amount of samples may be acquired, and thus, how to recover the full signal becomes an active research topic, but existing approaches cannot efficiently recover N-dimensional exponential signals with N = 3. In this paper, we study the problem of recovering N-dimensional (particularly N = 3) exponential signals from partial observations, and formulate this problem as a low-rank tensor completion problem with exponential factor vectors. The full signal is reconstructed by simultaneously exploiting the CANDECOMP/PARAFAC tensor structure and the exponential structure of the associated factor vectors. The latter is promoted by minimizing an objective function involving the nuclear norm of Hankel matrices. Experimental results on simulated and real magnetic resonance spectroscopy data show that the proposed approach can successfully recover full signals from very limited samples and is robust to the estimated tensor rank.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据