Compressed Imaging Reconstruction with Sparse Random Projection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the Internet of Things thrives, monitors and cameras produce tons of image data every day. To efficiently process these images, many compressed imaging frameworks are proposed. A compressed imaging framework comprises two parts, image signal measurement and reconstruction. Although a plethora of measurement devices have been designed, the development of the reconstruction is relatively lagging behind. Nowadays, most of existing reconstruction algorithms in compressed imaging are optimization problem solvers based on specific priors. The computation burdens of these optimization algorithms are enormous and the solutions are usually local optimums. Meanwhile, it is inconvenient to deploy these algorithms on cloud, which hinders the popularization of compressed imaging. In this article, we dive deep into the random projection to build reconstruction algorithms for compressed imaging. We first fully utilize the information in the measurement procedure and propose a combinatorial sparse random projection (SRP) reconstruction algorithm. Then, we generalize the SRP to a novel distributed algorithm called Cloud-SRP (CSRP), which enables efficient reconstruction on cloud. Moreover, we explore the combination of SRP with conventional optimization reconstruction algorithms and propose the Iterative-SRP (ISRP), which converges to a guaranteed fixed point. With minor modifications on the naive optimization algorithms, the ISRP yields better reconstructions. Experiments on real ghost imaging reconstruction reveal that our algorithms are effective. And simulation experiments show their advantages over the classical algorithms.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".