MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113771923 · doi:10.1109/tit.2021.3124598

NBIHT: An Efficient Algorithm for 1-Bit Compressed Sensing With Optimal Error Decay Rate

2021· preprint· en· W3113771923 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael P. Friedlander, Halyun Jeong, Yaniv Plan, Özgür Yılmaz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Theory · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPacific Institute for the Mathematical Sciences
KeywordsLogarithmCompressed sensingRate of convergenceAlgorithmInverseApproximation errorSquare rootMathematicsConvergence (economics)ThresholdingWord error rateBinary numberMean squared errorComputer scienceKey (lock)ArithmeticStatisticsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The <i>Binary Iterative Hard Thresholding</i> (BIHT) algorithm is a popular reconstruction method for one-bit compressed sensing due to its simplicity and fast empirical convergence. Despite considerable research on this algorithm, a theoretical understanding of the corresponding approximation error and convergence rate still remains an open problem. This paper shows that the normalized version of BIHT (NBIHT) achieves an approximation error rate optimal up to logarithmic factors. More precisely, using <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$m$ </tex-math></inline-formula> one-bit measurements of an <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$s$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-sparse vector <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$x$ </tex-math></inline-formula>, we prove that the approximation error of NBIHT is of order <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$O \left ({\frac{1 }{ m }}\right)$ </tex-math></inline-formula> up to logarithmic factors, which matches the information-theoretic lower bound <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\Omega \left ({\frac{1 }{ m }}\right)$ </tex-math></inline-formula> proved by Jacques, Laska, Boufounos, and Baraniuk in 2013. To our knowledge, this is the first theoretical analysis of a BIHT-type algorithm that explains the optimal rate of error decay empirically observed in the literature. This also makes NBIHT the first provable computationally-efficient one-bit compressed sensing algorithm that breaks the inverse square-root error decay rate <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$O \left ({\frac{1 }{ m^{1/2} }}\right)\vphantom {{\left ({\frac{1 }{ m^{1/2} }}\right)}^{'}}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information TheorySame topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207