Approximate sparse recovery: optimizing time and measurements

A Euclidean <i>approximate sparse recovery</i> system consists of parameters k,N, an m-by-N <i>measurement matrix</i>, Φ, and a decoding algorithm, D. Given a vector, x, the system approximates x by ^x=D(Φ x), which must satisfy ||<sup>x</sup> - x||<sub>2</sub>≤ C ||x - x<sub>k</sub>||<sub>2</sub>, where x<sub>k</sub> denotes the optimal k-term approximation to x. (The output ^x may have more than k terms). For each vector x, the system must succeed with probability at least 3/4. Among the goals in designing such systems are minimizing the number m of measurements and the runtime of the decoding algorithm, D. In this paper, we give a system with m=O(k log(N/k)) measurements--matching a lower bound, up to a constant factor--and decoding time k log<sup>{O(1)</sup> N, matching a lower bound up to log(N) factors. We also consider the encode time (<i>i.e.</i>, the time to multiply Φ by x), the time to update measurements (<i>i.e.</i>, the time to multiply Φ by a 1-sparse x), and the robustness and stability of the algorithm (adding noise before and after the measurements). Our encode and update times are optimal up to log(k) factors. The columns of Φ have at most O(log<sup>2</sup>(k)log(N/k)) non-zeros, each of which can be found in constant time. Our full result, an FPRAS, is as follows. If x=x<sub>k</sub>+ν<sub>1</sub>, where ν<sub>1</sub> and ν<sub>2</sub> (below) are arbitrary vectors (regarded as noise), then, setting ^x = D(Φ x + ν<sub>2</sub>), and for properly normalized ν, we get [||^x - x||<sub>2</sub><sup>2</sup> ≤ (1+ε)||ν<sub>1</sub>||<sub>2</sub><sup>2</sup> + ε||ν<sub>2</sub>||<sub>2</sub><sup>2</sup>,] using O((k/ε)log(N/k)) measurements and (k/ε)log<sup>O(1)</sup>(N) time for decoding.

[1]  David P. Woodruff,et al.  Lower bounds for sparse recovery , 2010, SODA '10.

[2]  Graham Cormode,et al.  What's hot and what's not: tracking most frequent items dynamically , 2003, PODS '03.

[3]  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.

[4]  R. DeVore,et al.  Compressed sensing and best k-term approximation , 2008 .

[5]  Graham Cormode,et al.  An Improved Data Stream Summary: The Count-Min Sketch and Its Applications , 2004, LATIN.

[6]  David J Brady,et al.  Fiber-optic localization by geometric space coding with a two-dimensional gray code. , 2005, Applied optics.

[7]  Moses Charikar,et al.  Finding frequent items in data streams , 2002, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[8]  Martin J. Wainwright,et al.  Information-theoretic limits on sparsity recovery in the high-dimensional and noisy setting , 2009, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[9]  Devdatt P. Dubhashi,et al.  Negative dependence through the FKG Inequality , 1996 .

[10]  R. Vershynin,et al.  One sketch for all: fast algorithms for compressed sensing , 2007, STOC '07.

[11]  Deanna Needell,et al.  CoSaMP: Iterative signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate samples , 2008, ArXiv.

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

[13]  Ely Porat,et al.  k -Mismatch with Don't Cares , 2007, ESA.

[14]  David P. Woodruff,et al.  ( 1 + )-approximate Sparse Recovery , 2011 .

[15]  David P. Woodruff,et al.  (1 + eps)-Approximate Sparse Recovery , 2011, 2011 IEEE 52nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[16]  Yunhui Zheng,et al.  Nonadaptive Group testing based fiber sensor deployment for multiperson tracking , 2006, IEEE Sensors Journal.

[17]  Noga Alon,et al.  The space complexity of approximating the frequency moments , 1996, STOC '96.

[18]  G. Hannon,et al.  DNA Sudoku--harnessing high-throughput sequencing for multiplexed specimen analysis. , 2009, Genome research.

[19]  Graham Cormode,et al.  Combinatorial Algorithms for Compressed Sensing , 2006, 2006 40th Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems.