v2010.10.26 - Convex Optimization
v2010.10.26 - Convex Optimization v2010.10.26 - Convex Optimization
344 CHAPTER 4. SEMIDEFINITE PROGRAMMINGf − s0.250.20.150.10.050(a)−0.05−0.1−0.15−0.2−0.250 100 200 300 400 500f and s0.250.20.150.10.050(b)−0.05−0.1−0.15−0.2−0.250 100 200 300 400 500Figure 102: (a) Error signal power (reconstruction f less original noiselesssignal s) is 36dB below s . (b) Original signal s overlaid withreconstruction f (red) from signal g having dropout plus noise.
4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 345We propose solving this nonconvex problem (773) by moving the cardinalityconstraint to the objective as a regularization term as explained in4.5;id est, by iteration of two convex problems until convergence:andminimize 〈x , y〉 +x∈R nsubject to f = Ψxx ≽ 0[∥minimizey∈R n 〈x ⋆ , y〉subject to 0 ≼ y ≼ 1]∥f 1:l − g 1:l ∥∥∥f n−l+1:n − g n−l+1:ny T 1 = n − k(525)(774)Signal cardinality 2l is implicit to the problem statement. When numberof samples in the dropout region exceeds half the window size, then thatdeficient cardinality of signal remaining becomes a source of degradationto reconstruction in presence of noise. Thus, by observation, we divinea reconstruction rule for this signal dropout problem to attain goodnoise suppression: l must exceed a maximum of cardinality bounds;2l ≥ max{2k , n/2}.Figure 101 and Figure 102 show one realization of this dropout problem.Original signal s is created by adding four (k = 4) randomly selected DCTbasis vectors, from Ψ (n = 500 in this example), whose amplitudes arerandomly selected from a uniform distribution above the noise floor; in theinterval [10 −10/20 , 1]. Then a 240-sample dropout is realized (l = 130) andGaussian noise η added to make corrupted signal g (from which a bestapproximation f will be made) having 10dB signal to noise ratio (772).The time gap contains much noise, as apparent from Figure 101a. But inonly a few iterations (774) (525), original signal s is recovered with relativeerror power 36dB down; illustrated in Figure 102. Correct cardinality isalso recovered (cardx = cardz) along with the basis vector indices used tomake original signal s . Approximation error is due to DCT basis coefficientestimate error. When this experiment is repeated 1000 times on noisy signalsaveraging 10dB SNR, the correct cardinality and indices are recovered 99%of the time with average relative error power 30dB down. Without noise, weget perfect reconstruction in one iteration. [Matlab code: Wıκımization]
- Page 293 and 294: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 293has norm ‖x ⋆
- Page 295 and 296: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 295minimize 1 TˆxX
- Page 297 and 298: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 297asminimize ‖ỹ
- Page 299 and 300: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 2994.3 Rank red
- Page 301 and 302: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 301A rank-reduc
- Page 303 and 304: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 303(t ⋆ i)
- Page 305 and 306: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 3054.3.3.0.1 Ex
- Page 307 and 308: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 3074.3.3.0.2 Ex
- Page 309 and 310: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 311 and 312: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 313 and 314: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 315 and 316: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 317 and 318: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 319 and 320: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 321 and 322: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 323 and 324: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 325 and 326: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 327 and 328: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 329 and 330: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 331 and 332: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 333 and 334: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 333mi
- Page 335 and 336: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 3350R
- Page 337 and 338: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 337it
- Page 339 and 340: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 339m/
- Page 341 and 342: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 341we
- Page 343: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 343fl
- Page 347 and 348: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 3474.
- Page 349 and 350: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 349R
- Page 351 and 352: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 351pe
- Page 353 and 354: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 355 and 356: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 357 and 358: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 359 and 360: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 361 and 362: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 363 and 364: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 365 and 366: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 367 and 368: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 369 and 370: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 371 and 372: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 373 and 374: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 375 and 376: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 377 and 378: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 379 and 380: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 381 and 382: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 383 and 384: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 385 and 386: 4.7. CONSTRAINING RANK OF INDEFINIT
- Page 387 and 388: 4.7. CONSTRAINING RANK OF INDEFINIT
- Page 389 and 390: 4.7. CONSTRAINING RANK OF INDEFINIT
- Page 391 and 392: 4.8. CONVEX ITERATION RANK-1 391whi
- Page 393 and 394: 4.8. CONVEX ITERATION RANK-1 393the
4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 345We propose solving this nonconvex problem (773) by moving the cardinalityconstraint to the objective as a regularization term as explained in4.5;id est, by iteration of two convex problems until convergence:andminimize 〈x , y〉 +x∈R nsubject to f = Ψxx ≽ 0[∥minimizey∈R n 〈x ⋆ , y〉subject to 0 ≼ y ≼ 1]∥f 1:l − g 1:l ∥∥∥f n−l+1:n − g n−l+1:ny T 1 = n − k(525)(774)Signal cardinality 2l is implicit to the problem statement. When numberof samples in the dropout region exceeds half the window size, then thatdeficient cardinality of signal remaining becomes a source of degradationto reconstruction in presence of noise. Thus, by observation, we divinea reconstruction rule for this signal dropout problem to attain goodnoise suppression: l must exceed a maximum of cardinality bounds;2l ≥ max{2k , n/2}.Figure 101 and Figure 102 show one realization of this dropout problem.Original signal s is created by adding four (k = 4) randomly selected DCTbasis vectors, from Ψ (n = 500 in this example), whose amplitudes arerandomly selected from a uniform distribution above the noise floor; in theinterval [10 −10/20 , 1]. Then a 240-sample dropout is realized (l = 130) andGaussian noise η added to make corrupted signal g (from which a bestapproximation f will be made) having 10dB signal to noise ratio (772).The time gap contains much noise, as apparent from Figure 101a. But inonly a few iterations (774) (525), original signal s is recovered with relativeerror power 36dB down; illustrated in Figure 102. Correct cardinality isalso recovered (cardx = cardz) along with the basis vector indices used tomake original signal s . Approximation error is due to DCT basis coefficientestimate error. When this experiment is repeated 1000 times on noisy signalsaveraging 10dB SNR, the correct cardinality and indices are recovered 99%of the time with average relative error power 30dB down. Without noise, weget perfect reconstruction in one iteration. [Matlab code: Wıκımization]