Top-Down and Bottom-Up Tree Search Algorithms for Selecting Bases in Wavelet Packet Transforms

  • Carl Taswell
Part of the Lecture Notes in Statistics book series (LNS, volume 103)

Abstract

Search algorithms for finding signal decompositions called near-best bases using decision criteria called non-additive information costs have recently been proposed by Taswell [12] for selecting bases in wavelet packet transforms represented as binary trees. These methods are extended here to distinguish between top-down and bottom-up tree searches. Other new non-additive information cost functions are also proposed. In particular, the near-best basis with the non-additive cost of the Shannon entropy on probabilities is compared against the best basis with the additive cost of the Coifman-Wickerhauser entropy on energies [3]. All wavelet packet basis decompositions are also compared with the nonorthogonal matching pursuit decomposition of Mallat and Zhang [7] and the orthogonal matching pursuit decomposition of Patiet al [8]. Monte Carlo experiments using a constant-bit-rate variable-distortion paradigm for lossy compression suggest that the statistical performance of top-down near-best bases with non-additive costs is superior to that of bottom-up best bases with additive costs. Top-down near-best bases provide a significant increase in computational efficiency with reductions in memory, flops, and time while nevertheless maintaining similar coding efficiency with comparable re-construction errors measured by ℓ p -norms. Finally, a new compression scheme called parameterized model coding is introduced and demonstrated with results showing better compression than standard scalar quantization coding at comparable levels of distortion.

Keywords

Entropy Expense Sorting Terrell 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Joseph Berkson. Relative precision of minimum chi-square and maximum likelihood estimates of regression coefficients. In Jerzy Neyman, editor,Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, pages 471–479. University of California Press, 1951.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Albert Cohen, Ingrid Daubechies, and Pierre Vial. Wavelets on the interval and fast wavelet transforms.Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis, 1 (1): 54–81, December 1993.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Ronald R. Coifman and Mladen Victor Wickerhauser. Entropy-based algorithms for best basis selection.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 38 (2): 713–718, March 1992.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Ingrid Daubechies. Orthonormal bases of compactly supported wavelets: Ii. variations on a theme.SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis, 24 (2): 499–519, March 1993.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    David L. Donoho. Unconditional bases are optimal bases for data compression and for statistical estimation.Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis, 1 (1): 100–115, December 1993.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. I. Khinchin.Mathematical Foundations of Information Theory. Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1957.MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Stephane G. Mallat and Zhifeng Zhang. Matching pursuits with time-frequency dictionaries.IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 41 (12): 3397–3415, December 1993.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Y.C. Pati, R. Rezaiifar, and P. S. Krishnaprasad. Orthogonal matching pursuit: Recursive function approximation with application to wavelet decomposition. InProceedings of the 27th Annual Asilomar Conference on Signals Systems and Computers, pages 40–44, Pacific Grove, CA, November 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Kannan Ramchandran and Martin Vetterli. Best wavelet packet bases in a rate-distortion sense.IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2 (2): 160–175, April 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    David A. Ratkowsky.Handbook of Nonlinear Regression Models, volume 107 ofStatistics: Textbooks and Monographs. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, NY, 1990.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    David W. Scott.Multivariate Density Estimation: Theory, Practice, and Visualization. Wiley Series in Applied Probability and Statistics. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1992.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Carl Taswell. Near-best basis selection algorithms with non-additive information cost functions. In Moeness G. Amin, editor,Proceedings of the IEEE-SP International Symposium on Time-Frequency and Time-Scale Analysis, pages 13–16, Philadelphia, PA, October 1994. IEEE Press 94TH8007.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Carl Taswell. WavBox 4: A software toolbox for wavelet transforms and adaptive wavelet packet decompositions. In Anestis Antoniadis and Georges Oppenheim, editors,Wavelets and Statistics, Lecture Notes in Statistics. Springer Verlag, 1995. Proceedings of the Villard de Lans Conference November 1994.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Carl Taswell and Kevin C. McGill. Algorithm 735: Wavelet transform algorithms for finite- duration discrete-time signals. ACMTransactions on Mathematical Software, 20 (3): 398–412, September 1994.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Mladen Victor Wickerhauser . INRIA lectures on wavelet packet algorithms. Technical report, INRIA, Roquencourt, France, 1991. minicourse lecture notes.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carl Taswell
    • 1
  1. 1.Scientific Computing and Computational MathematicsStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations