Coding-theoretic methods for sparse recovery

We review connections between coding-theoretic objects and sparse learning problems. In particular, we show how seemingly different combinatorial objects such as error-correcting codes, combinatorial designs, spherical codes, compressed sensing matrices and group testing designs can be obtained from one another. The reductions enable one to translate upper and lower bounds on the parameters attainable by one object to another. We survey some of the well-known reductions in a unified presentation, and bring some existing gaps to attention. New reductions are also introduced; in particular, we bring up the notion of minimum L-wise distance of codes and show that this notion closely captures the combinatorial structure of RIP-2 matrices. Moreover, we show how this weaker variation of the minimum distance is related to combinatorial list-decoding properties of codes.

[1]  Venkatesan Guruswami,et al.  Extensions to the Johnson bound , 2001 .

[2]  Alex Samorodnitsky,et al.  Linear Programming Bounds for Codes via a Covering Argument , 2007, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[3]  Richard C. Singleton,et al.  Nonrandom binary superimposed codes , 1964, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[4]  D. Du,et al.  Combinatorial Group Testing and Its Applications , 1993 .

[5]  Ronald A. DeVore,et al.  Deterministic constructions of compressed sensing matrices , 2007, J. Complex..

[6]  A. Robert Calderbank,et al.  A fast reconstruction algorithm for deterministic compressive sensing using second order reed-muller codes , 2008, 2008 42nd Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems.

[7]  A. Robert Calderbank,et al.  Deterministic compressed sensing , 2011 .

[8]  Emmanuel J. Candès,et al.  Decoding by linear programming , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[9]  E. Candès,et al.  Stable signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate measurements , 2005, math/0503066.

[10]  D. Du,et al.  Pooling Designs And Nonadaptive Group Testing: Important Tools For Dna Sequencing , 2006 .

[11]  Yuan Zhou Introduction to Coding Theory , 2010 .

[12]  Piotr Indyk,et al.  Combining geometry and combinatorics: A unified approach to sparse signal recovery , 2008, 2008 46th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing.

[13]  Stephen J. Dilworth,et al.  Explicit constructions of RIP matrices and related problems , 2010, ArXiv.

[14]  Deanna Needell,et al.  Signal Recovery From Incomplete and Inaccurate Measurements Via Regularized Orthogonal Matching Pursuit , 2007, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing.

[15]  R. Calderbank,et al.  Chirp sensing codes: Deterministic compressed sensing measurements for fast recovery , 2009 .

[16]  Vahid Tarokh,et al.  A Frame Construction and a Universal Distortion Bound for Sparse Representations , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[17]  Emmanuel J. Candès,et al.  Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[18]  P. Erdös,et al.  Families of finite sets in which no set is covered by the union ofr others , 1985 .

[19]  E. Candès The restricted isometry property and its implications for compressed sensing , 2008 .

[20]  E. Gilbert A comparison of signalling alphabets , 1952 .

[21]  Salil P. Vadhan,et al.  The unified theory of pseudorandomness , 2010 .

[22]  Ely Porat,et al.  Search Methodologies , 2022 .

[23]  Venkatesan Guruswami,et al.  Combinatorial bounds for list decoding , 2002, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[24]  Emmanuel J. Candès,et al.  Near-Optimal Signal Recovery From Random Projections: Universal Encoding Strategies? , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[25]  J. H. van Lint,et al.  Introduction to Coding Theory , 1982 .