Approximation-Tolerant Model-Based Compressive Sensing

The goal of sparse recovery is to recover a k-sparse signal x e Rn from (possibly noisy) linear measurements of the form y = Ax, where A e Rmxn describes the measurement process. Standard results in compressive sensing show that it is possible to recover the signal x from m = O(k log(n/k)) measurements, and that this bound is tight. The framework of model-based compressive sensing [BCDH10] overcomes the lower bound and reduces the number of measurements further to O(k) by limiting the supports of x to a subset M of the (nk) possible supports. This has led to many measurement-efficient algorithms for a wide variety of signal models, including block-sparsity and tree-sparsity. Unfortunately, extending the framework to other, more general models has been stymied by the following obstacle: for the framework to apply, one needs an algorithm that, given a signal x, solves the following optimization problem exactly: [EQUATION] (here x[n]\Ω denotes the projection of x on coordinates not in Ω). However, an approximation algorithm for this optimization task is not sufficient. Since many problems of this form are not known to have exact polynomial-time algorithms, this requirement poses an obstacle for extending the framework to a richer class of models. In this paper, we remove this obstacle and show how to extend the model-based compressive sensing framework so that it requires only approximate solutions to the aforementioned optimization problems. Interestingly, our extension requires the existence of approximation algorithms for both the maximization and the minimization variants of the optimization problem. Further, we apply our framework to the Constrained Earth Mover's Distance (CEMD) model introduced in [SHI13], obtaining a sparse recovery scheme that uses significantly less than O(k log(n/k)) measurements. This is the first non-trivial theoretical bound for this model, since the validation of the approach presented in [SHI13] was purely empirical. The result is obtained by designing a novel approximation algorithm for the maximization version of the problem and proving approximation guarantees for the minimization algorithm described in [SHI13].

[1]  Mike E. Davies,et al.  Sampling Theorems for Signals From the Union of Finite-Dimensional Linear Subspaces , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[2]  Piotr Indyk,et al.  Sparse Recovery Using Sparse Matrices , 2010, Proceedings of the IEEE.

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

[4]  Yonina C. Eldar,et al.  Structured Compressed Sensing: From Theory to Applications , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[5]  R.G. Baraniuk,et al.  Distributed Compressed Sensing of Jointly Sparse Signals , 2005, Conference Record of the Thirty-Ninth Asilomar Conference onSignals, Systems and Computers, 2005..

[6]  Volkan Cevher,et al.  Model-Based Compressive Sensing , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[7]  E. Gluskin NORMS OF RANDOM MATRICES AND WIDTHS OF FINITE-DIMENSIONAL SETS , 1984 .

[8]  Volkan Cevher,et al.  Sublinear Time, Approximate Model-based Sparse Recovery For All , 2012, ArXiv.

[9]  Holger Rauhut,et al.  The Gelfand widths of lp-balls for 0p<=1 , 2010, J. Complex..

[10]  S. Frick,et al.  Compressed Sensing , 2014, Computer Vision, A Reference Guide.

[11]  S. Muthukrishnan,et al.  Data streams: algorithms and applications , 2005, SODA '03.

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

[13]  Michael Elad,et al.  Iterative Hard Thresholding with Near Optimal Projection for Signal Recovery , 2013 .

[14]  Wei Lu,et al.  Modified-CS: Modifying compressive sensing for problems with partially known support , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory.

[15]  Deanna Needell,et al.  Signal Space CoSaMP for Sparse Recovery With Redundant Dictionaries , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

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

[17]  B. S. Kašin,et al.  DIAMETERS OF SOME FINITE-DIMENSIONAL SETS AND CLASSES OF SMOOTH FUNCTIONS , 1977 .

[18]  Marco F. Duarte,et al.  Compressive sensing recovery of spike trains using a structured sparsity model , 2009 .

[19]  Thomas Blumensath,et al.  Sampling and Reconstructing Signals From a Union of Linear Subspaces , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[20]  Piotr Indyk,et al.  The Constrained Earth Mover Distance Model, with Applications to Compressive Sensing , 2013 .

[21]  Peter J. Woolf,et al.  poolMC: Smart pooling of mRNA samples in microarray experiments , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[22]  Holger Rauhut,et al.  The Gelfand widths of ℓp-balls for 0 , 2010, ArXiv.

[23]  Piotr Indyk,et al.  Automatic fault localization using the generalized Earth Mover's distance , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP).

[24]  Ken Cottrill A NEW RECIPE , 2002 .

[25]  Andrej Yu. Garnaev,et al.  On widths of the Euclidean Ball , 1984 .

[26]  Peter J. Bickel,et al.  The Earth Mover's distance is the Mallows distance: some insights from statistics , 2001, Proceedings Eighth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision. ICCV 2001.

[27]  Piotr Indyk,et al.  K-median clustering, model-based compressive sensing, and sparse recovery for earth mover distance , 2011, STOC '11.

[28]  Mike E. Davies,et al.  Iterative Hard Thresholding for Compressed Sensing , 2008, ArXiv.