Sparse Components of Images and Optimal Atomic Decompositions

Abstract. Recently, Field, Lewicki, Olshausen, and Sejnowski have reported efforts to identify the ``Sparse Components'' of image data. Their empirical findings indicate that such components have elongated shapes and assume a wide range of positions, orientations, and scales. To date, sparse components analysis (SCA) has only been conducted on databases of small (e.g., 16 by 16) image patches and there seems limited prospect of dramatically increased resolving power. In this paper, we apply mathematical analysis to a specific formalization of SCA using synthetic image models, hoping to gain insight into what might emerge from a higher-resolution SCA based on n by n image patches for large n but a constant field of view. In our formalization, we study a class of objects \cal F in a functional space; they are to be represented by linear combinations of atoms from an overcomplete dictionary, and sparsity is measured by the ℓp -norm of the coefficients in the linear combination. We focus on the class \cal F = \sc Starα of black and white images with the black region consisting of a star-shaped set with an α -smooth boundary. We aim to find an optimal dictionary, one achieving the optimal sparsity in an atomic decomposition uniformly over members of the class \sc Starα . We show that there is a well-defined optimal sparsity of representation of members of \sc Starα; there are decompositions with finite ℓp -norm for p > 2/(α+1) but not for p < 2/(α+1) . We show that the optimal degree of sparsity is nearly attained using atomic decompositions based on the wedgelet dictionary. Wedgelets provide a system of representation by elements in a dyadically organized collection, at all scales, locations, orientations, and positions. The atoms of our atomic decomposition contain both coarse-scale dyadic ``blobs,'' which are simply wedgelets from our dictionary, and fine-scale ``needles,'' which are differences of pairs of wedgelets. The fine-scale atoms used in the adaptive atomic decomposition are highly anisotropic and occupy a range of positions, scales, and locations. This agrees qualitatively with the visual appearance of empirically determined sparse components of natural images. The set has certain definite scaling properties; for example, the number of atoms of length l scales as 1/l , and, when the object has α -smooth boundaries, the number of atoms with anisotropy \approx A scales as \approx Aα-1 .

[1]  Toby Berger,et al.  Rate distortion theory : a mathematical basis for data compression , 1971 .

[2]  Peter W. Jones Rectifiable sets and the Traveling Salesman Problem , 1990 .

[3]  Ronald R. Coifman,et al.  Entropy-based algorithms for best basis selection , 1992, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[4]  S. Semmes,et al.  Analysis of and on uniformly rectifiable sets , 1993 .

[5]  D. Donoho Unconditional Bases Are Optimal Bases for Data Compression and for Statistical Estimation , 1993 .

[6]  George G. Lorentz,et al.  Constructive Approximation , 1993, Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften.

[7]  A. Tsybakov,et al.  Minimax theory of image reconstruction , 1993 .

[8]  V. Temlyakov,et al.  On bestm-term approximations and the entropy of sets in the spaceL1 , 1994 .

[9]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  An Information-Maximization Approach to Blind Separation and Blind Deconvolution , 1995, Neural Computation.

[10]  C. Fyfe,et al.  Finding compact and sparse-distributed representations of visual images , 1995 .

[11]  D. Donoho Unconditional Bases and Bit-Level Compression , 1996 .

[12]  David J. Field,et al.  Emergence of simple-cell receptive field properties by learning a sparse code for natural images , 1996, Nature.

[13]  R W Prager,et al.  Development of low entropy coding in a recurrent network. , 1996, Network.

[14]  D. Donoho CART AND BEST-ORTHO-BASIS: A CONNECTION' , 1997 .

[15]  David J. Field,et al.  Sparse coding with an overcomplete basis set: A strategy employed by V1? , 1997, Vision Research.

[16]  Erkki Oja,et al.  Applications of neural blind separation to signal and image processing , 1997, 1997 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[17]  Bruno A. Olshausen,et al.  Inferring Sparse, Overcomplete Image Codes Using an Efficient Coding Framework , 1998, NIPS.

[18]  J. V. van Hateren,et al.  Independent component filters of natural images compared with simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[19]  J. H. Hateren,et al.  Independent component filters of natural images compared with simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998 .

[20]  Peter Földiák,et al.  SPARSE CODING IN THE PRIMATE CORTEX , 2002 .

[21]  D. Ruderman,et al.  INDEPENDENT COMPONENT ANALYSIS OF NATURAL IMAGE SEQUENCES YIELDS SPATIOTEMPORAL FILTERS SIMILAR TO SIMPLE CELLS IN PRIMARY VISUAL CORTEX , 1998 .

[22]  David J. Field Visual coding, redundancy, and “feature detection” , 1998 .

[23]  Michael A. Saunders,et al.  Atomic Decomposition by Basis Pursuit , 1998, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[24]  D. Ruderman,et al.  Independent component analysis of natural image sequences yields spatio-temporal filters similar to simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[25]  D. Donoho Wedgelets: nearly minimax estimation of edges , 1999 .

[26]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  Learning Overcomplete Representations , 2000, Neural Computation.