Advertisement

Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications

, Volume 180, Issue 2, pp 374–396 | Cite as

Maximal Solutions of Sparse Analysis Regularization

  • Abdessamad Barbara
  • Abderrahim JouraniEmail author
  • Samuel Vaiter
Article
  • 89 Downloads

Abstract

This paper deals with the non-uniqueness of the solutions of an analysis—Lasso regularization. Most previous works in this area are concerned with the case, where the solution set is a singleton, or to derive guarantees to enforce uniqueness. Our main contribution consists in providing a geometrical interpretation of a solution with a maximal analysis support: such a solution abides in the relative interior of the solution set. Our result allows us to provide a way to exhibit a maximal solution using a primal-dual interior point algorithm.

Keywords

Lasso Analysis sparsity Uniqueness Inverse problem Support identification Barrier penalization 

Mathematics Subject Classification

90C25 49J52 

References

  1. 1.
    Chen, S.S., Donoho, D.L., Saunders, M.A.: Atomic decomposition by basis pursuit. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 20(1), 33–61 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mallat, S.G.: A wavelet tour of signal processing, 3rd edn. Academic Press, Amsterdam (2009)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tibshirani, R.: Regression shrinkage and selection via the Lasso. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B. Methodol. 58(1), 267–288 (1996)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Elad, M., Milanfar, P., Rubinstein, R.: Analysis versus synthesis in signal priors. Inverse Probl. 23(3), 947 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vaiter, S., Peyré, G., Dossal, C., Fadili, M.J.: Robust sparse analysis regularization. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 59(4), 2001–2016 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nam, S., Davies, M.E., Elad, M., Gribonval, R.: The cosparse analysis model and algorithms. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 34(1), 30–56 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rudin, L., Osher, S., Fatemi, E.: Nonlinear total variation based noise removal algorithms. Phys. D 60(1), 259–268 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Steidl, G., Weickert, J., Brox, T., Mrázek, P., Welk, M.: On the equivalence of soft wavelet shrinkage, total variation diffusion, total variation regularization, and sides. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 42(2), 686–713 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tibshirani, R., Saunders, M., Rosset, S., Zhu, J., Knight, K.: Sparsity and smoothness via the fused Lasso. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B. Stat. Methodol. 67(1), 91–108 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang, H., Yin, W., Cheng, L.: Necessary and sufficient conditions of solution uniqueness in 1-norm minimization. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 164(1), 109–122 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang, H., Yan, M., Yin, W.: One condition for solution uniqueness and robustness of both l1-synthesis and l1-analysis minimizations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1304.5038 (2013)
  12. 12.
    Gilbert, J.C.: On the solution uniqueness characterization in the \(\ell ^1\) norm and polyhedral gauge recovery. Technical report, INRIA Paris-Rocquencourt (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tibshirani, R.J.: The lasso problem and uniqueness. Electron. J. Stat. 7, 1456–1490 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Natarajan, B.K.: Sparse approximate solutions to linear systems. SIAM J. Comput. 24(2), 227–234 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mallat, S.G., Zhang, Z.: Matching pursuits with time–frequency dictionaries. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 41(12), 3397–3415 (1993)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pati, Y.C., Rezaiifar, R., Krishnaprasad, P.S.: Orthogonal matching pursuit: recursive function approximation with applications to wavelet decomposition. In: Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, pp. 40–44. IEEE (1993)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Needell, D., Tropp, J.A.: CoSaMP: iterative signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate samples. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 26(3), 301–321 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Attouch, H., Cominetti, R.: \(l^p\) approximation of variational problems in \(l^1\) and \(l^\infty \). Nonlinear Anal. TMA 36(3), 373–399 (1999)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rockafellar, R.: Convex Analysis, vol. 28. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Frisch, K.R.: The logarithmic potential method of convex programming. Technical report, University Institute of Economics, Oslo, Norway (1955)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Barbara, A.: Strict quasi-concavity and the differential barrier property of gauges in linear programming. Optimization 64(12), 2649–2677 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Barbara, A., Crouzeix, J.P.: Concave gauge functions and applications. Math. Methods OR 40(1), 43–74 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Roos, C., Terlaky, T., Vial, J.P.: Interior Point Methods for Mathematical Programming. Wiley, New York (2009)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mehrotra, S.: On the implementation of a primal-dual interior point method. SIAM J. Optim. 2(4), 575–601 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université de Bourgogne Franche-ComtéDijonFrance
  2. 2.CNRSUniversité de Bourgogne Franche-ComtéDijonFrance

Personalised recommendations