Entropy-based uncertainty measures for L/sup 2/(/spl Ropf//sup n/), /spl lscr//sup 2/(/spl Zopf/), and /spl lscr//sup 2/(/spl Zopf//N/spl Zopf/) with a Hirschman optimal transform for /spl lscr//sup 2/(/spl Zopf//N/spl Zopf/)

The traditional Heisenberg-Weyl measure quantifies the joint localization, uncertainty, or concentration of a signal in the phase plane based on a product of energies expressed as signal variances in time and in frequency. In the image processing literature, the term compactness also has been used to refer to this same notion of joint localization, in the sense of a signal representation that is efficient simultaneously in time (or space) and frequency. In this paper, we consider Hirschman uncertainty principles based not on energies and variances directly but rather on entropies computed with respect to normalized energy densities in time and frequency. Unlike the Heisenberg-Weyl measure, this entropic Hirschman notion of joint uncertainty extends naturally from the case of infinitely supported continuous-time signals to the cases of both finitely and infinitely supported discrete-time signals. For the first time, we consider these three cases together and study them relative to one another. In the case of infinitely supported continuous-time signals, we find that, consistent with the energy-based Heisenberg principle, the optimal time-frequency concentration with respect to the Hirschman uncertainty principle is realized by translated and modulated Gaussian functions. In the two discrete cases, however, the entropy-based measure yields optimizers that may be generated by applying compositions of operators to the Kronecker delta. Study of the discrete cases yields two interesting results. First, in the finitely supported case, the Hirschman-optimal functions coincide with the so-called "picket fence" functions that are also optimal with respect to the joint time-frequency counting measure of Donoho and Stark. Second, the Hirschman optimal functions in the infinitely supported case can be reconciled with continuous-time Gaussians through a certain limiting process. While a different limiting process can be used to reconcile the finitely and infinitely supported discrete cases, there does not appear to be a straightforward limiting process that unifies all three cases: The optimizers from the finitely supported discrete case are decidedly non-Gaussian. We perform a very simple experiment that indicates that the Hirschman optimal transform (HOT) is superior to the discrete Fourier transform (DFT) and discrete cosine transform (DCT) in terms of its ability to separate or resolve two limiting cases of localization in frequency, viz. pure tones and additive white noise. We believe that these differences arise from the use of entropy rather than energy as an optimality criterion and are intimately related to the apparent incongruence between the infinitely supported continuous-time case and the finitely supported discrete-time case.

[1]  Christopher J. Zarowski,et al.  DFT spectrum filtering , 1988, IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process..

[2]  W. Beckner Inequalities in Fourier analysis , 1975 .

[3]  William Beckner,et al.  Pitt’s inequality and the uncertainty principle , 1995 .

[4]  Donald B. Percival,et al.  Spectrum estimation by wavelet thresholding of multitaper estimators , 1998, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[5]  Barry G. Quinn A fast efficient technique for the estimation of frequency: Interpretation and generalisation , 1999 .

[6]  Pierre Moulin Wavelet thresholding techniques for power spectrum estimation , 1994, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[7]  Gregory K. Wallace,et al.  The JPEG still picture compression standard , 1991, CACM.

[8]  Victor E. DeBrunner,et al.  The optimal transform for the discrete Hirschman uncertainty principle , 2001, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[9]  David L. Donoho,et al.  Application of basis pursuit in spectrum estimation , 1998, Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, ICASSP '98 (Cat. No.98CH36181).

[10]  Victor E. DeBrunner,et al.  Resolution in time-frequency , 1999, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[11]  Victor E. DeBrunner,et al.  Analysis in a finite time-frequency plane , 2000, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[12]  Amir Dembo,et al.  Information theoretic inequalities , 1991, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[13]  D. L. Donoho,et al.  Ideal spacial adaptation via wavelet shrinkage , 1994 .

[14]  J. Daugman Uncertainty relation for resolution in space, spatial frequency, and orientation optimized by two-dimensional visual cortical filters. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[15]  L. Hörmander,et al.  The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators I: Distribution Theory and Fourier Analysis , 1983 .

[16]  M. Özaydin,et al.  AN ENTROPY-BASED UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE FOR A LOCALLY COMPACT ABELIAN GROUP , 2004 .

[17]  Victor E. DeBrunner,et al.  Using a new uncertainty measure to determine optimal bases for signal representations , 1999, 1999 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing. Proceedings. ICASSP99 (Cat. No.99CH36258).

[18]  D. Donoho,et al.  Uncertainty principles and signal recovery , 1989 .

[19]  Allan Steinhardt,et al.  Thresholds in frequency estimation , 1985, ICASSP '85. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[20]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[21]  Maarten Jansen,et al.  Noise Reduction by Wavelet Thresholding , 2001 .

[22]  Victor E. DeBrunner,et al.  The optimal solutions to the continuous and discrete-time versions of the Hirschman uncertainty principle , 2000, 2000 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing. Proceedings (Cat. No.00CH37100).

[23]  Peter J. Kootsookos,et al.  Threshold behavior of the maximum likelihood estimator of frequency , 1994, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[24]  Eliahu Levy,et al.  A note about entropy , 2006 .