Zhilin Zhang, Bhaskar D. Rao University of California, San Diego March 28, 2012 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Joint work with Irad Yavneh
Advertisements

ECE 8443 – Pattern Recognition LECTURE 05: MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION Objectives: Discrete Features Maximum Likelihood Resources: D.H.S: Chapter 3 (Part.
CS479/679 Pattern Recognition Dr. George Bebis
Structured Sparse Principal Component Analysis Reading Group Presenter: Peng Zhang Cognitive Radio Institute Friday, October 01, 2010 Authors: Rodolphe.
2 – In previous chapters: – We could design an optimal classifier if we knew the prior probabilities P(wi) and the class- conditional probabilities P(x|wi)
Fast Bayesian Matching Pursuit Presenter: Changchun Zhang ECE / CMR Tennessee Technological University November 12, 2010 Reading Group (Authors: Philip.
Exploiting Sparse Markov and Covariance Structure in Multiresolution Models Presenter: Zhe Chen ECE / CMR Tennessee Technological University October 22,
Multi-Task Compressive Sensing with Dirichlet Process Priors Yuting Qi 1, Dehong Liu 1, David Dunson 2, and Lawrence Carin 1 1 Department of Electrical.
1 Parametric Sensitivity Analysis For Cancer Survival Models Using Large- Sample Normal Approximations To The Bayesian Posterior Distribution Gordon B.
2008 SIAM Conference on Imaging Science July 7, 2008 Jason A. Palmer
Compressed sensing Carlos Becker, Guillaume Lemaître & Peter Rennert
Learning With Dynamic Group Sparsity Junzhou Huang Xiaolei Huang Dimitris Metaxas Rutgers University Lehigh University Rutgers University.
Bayesian Robust Principal Component Analysis Presenter: Raghu Ranganathan ECE / CMR Tennessee Technological University January 21, 2011 Reading Group (Xinghao.
Relational Learning with Gaussian Processes By Wei Chu, Vikas Sindhwani, Zoubin Ghahramani, S.Sathiya Keerthi (Columbia, Chicago, Cambridge, Yahoo!) Presented.
Volkan Cevher, Marco F. Duarte, and Richard G. Baraniuk European Signal Processing Conference 2008.
Estimating Surface Normals in Noisy Point Cloud Data Niloy J. Mitra, An Nguyen Stanford University.
Predictive Automatic Relevance Determination by Expectation Propagation Yuan (Alan) Qi Thomas P. Minka Rosalind W. Picard Zoubin Ghahramani.
A Single-letter Characterization of Optimal Noisy Compressed Sensing Dongning Guo Dror Baron Shlomo Shamai.
An Optimal Learning Approach to Finding an Outbreak of a Disease Warren Scott Warren Powell
Study of Sparse Online Gaussian Process for Regression EE645 Final Project May 2005 Eric Saint Georges.
Hybrid Dense/Sparse Matrices in Compressed Sensing Reconstruction
Topics in MMSE Estimation for Sparse Approximation Michael Elad The Computer Science Department The Technion – Israel Institute of technology Haifa 32000,
Empirical Bayes approaches to thresholding Bernard Silverman, University of Bristol (joint work with Iain Johnstone, Stanford) IMS meeting 30 July 2002.
Sparsity-Aware Adaptive Algorithms Based on Alternating Optimization and Shrinkage Rodrigo C. de Lamare* + and Raimundo Sampaio-Neto * + Communications.
Two and a half problems in homogenization of climate series concluding remarks to Daily Stew Ralf Lindau.
Graph-based consensus clustering for class discovery from gene expression data Zhiwen Yum, Hau-San Wong and Hongqiang Wang Bioinformatics, 2007.
Chapter Two Probability Distributions: Discrete Variables
EE513 Audio Signals and Systems Statistical Pattern Classification Kevin D. Donohue Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Kentucky.
Binary Variables (1) Coin flipping: heads=1, tails=0 Bernoulli Distribution.
The horseshoe estimator for sparse signals CARLOS M. CARVALHO NICHOLAS G. POLSON JAMES G. SCOTT Biometrika (2010) Presented by Eric Wang 10/14/2010.
Mining Discriminative Components With Low-Rank and Sparsity Constraints for Face Recognition Qiang Zhang, Baoxin Li Computer Science and Engineering Arizona.
Compressive Sensing Based on Local Regional Data in Wireless Sensor Networks Hao Yang, Liusheng Huang, Hongli Xu, Wei Yang 2012 IEEE Wireless Communications.
Cs: compressed sensing
Learning With Structured Sparsity
ECE 8443 – Pattern Recognition ECE 8423 – Adaptive Signal Processing Objectives: Deterministic vs. Random Maximum A Posteriori Maximum Likelihood Minimum.
ECE 8443 – Pattern Recognition LECTURE 07: MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD AND BAYESIAN ESTIMATION Objectives: Class-Conditional Density The Multivariate Case General.
A Novel Method for Burst Error Recovery of Images First Author: S. Talebi Second Author: F. Marvasti Affiliations: King’s College London
Compressive Sensing for Multimedia Communications in Wireless Sensor Networks By: Wael BarakatRabih Saliba EE381K-14 MDDSP Literary Survey Presentation.
SUPA Advanced Data Analysis Course, Jan 6th – 7th 2009 Advanced Data Analysis for the Physical Sciences Dr Martin Hendry Dept of Physics and Astronomy.
Shriram Sarvotham Dror Baron Richard Baraniuk ECE Department Rice University dsp.rice.edu/cs Sudocodes Fast measurement and reconstruction of sparse signals.
Comparison and Analysis of Equalization Techniques for the Time-Varying Underwater Acoustic Channel Ballard Blair PhD Candidate MIT/WHOI.
Learning to Sense Sparse Signals: Simultaneous Sensing Matrix and Sparsifying Dictionary Optimization Julio Martin Duarte-Carvajalino, and Guillermo Sapiro.
Bayesian Generalized Kernel Mixed Models Zhihua Zhang, Guang Dai and Michael I. Jordan JMLR 2011.
ECE 8443 – Pattern Recognition ECE 8527 – Introduction to Machine Learning and Pattern Recognition LECTURE 07: BAYESIAN ESTIMATION (Cont.) Objectives:
Full-rank Gaussian modeling of convolutive audio mixtures applied to source separation Ngoc Q. K. Duong, Supervisor: R. Gribonval and E. Vincent METISS.
A Semi-Blind Technique for MIMO Channel Matrix Estimation Aditya Jagannatham and Bhaskar D. Rao The proposed algorithm performs well compared to its training.
Guest lecture: Feature Selection Alan Qi Dec 2, 2004.
Univariate Gaussian Case (Cont.)
Multi-label Prediction via Sparse Infinite CCA Piyush Rai and Hal Daume III NIPS 2009 Presented by Lingbo Li ECE, Duke University July 16th, 2010 Note:
A Study on Speaker Adaptation of Continuous Density HMM Parameters By Chin-Hui Lee, Chih-Heng Lin, and Biing-Hwang Juang Presented by: 陳亮宇 1990 ICASSP/IEEE.
Biointelligence Laboratory, Seoul National University
Univariate Gaussian Case (Cont.)
Bayesian Semi-Parametric Multiple Shrinkage
Chapter 3: Maximum-Likelihood Parameter Estimation
CS 2750: Machine Learning Density Estimation
Parameter Estimation 主講人:虞台文.
Rey R. Ramirez & Sylvain Baillet Neurospeed Laboratory, MEG Program,
Analyzing Redistribution Matrix with Wavelet
Learning With Dynamic Group Sparsity
Presenter: Xudong Zhu Authors: Xudong Zhu, etc.
Basic Econometrics Chapter 4: THE NORMALITY ASSUMPTION:
'Linear Hierarchical Models'
Where did we stop? The Bayes decision rule guarantees an optimal classification… … But it requires the knowledge of P(ci|x) (or p(x|ci) and P(ci)) We.
Master Thesis Presentation
Sudocodes Fast measurement and reconstruction of sparse signals
LECTURE 09: BAYESIAN LEARNING
Parametric Methods Berlin Chen, 2005 References:
Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning Chapter 2: Probability Distributions July chonbuk national university.
Sudocodes Fast measurement and reconstruction of sparse signals
FOCUS PRIOR ESTIMATION FOR SALIENT OBJECT DETECTION
Presentation transcript:

Zhilin Zhang, Bhaskar D. Rao University of California, San Diego March 28,

Outline 1. Introduction 2. The Framework of Block Sparse Bayesian Learning (BSBL) 3. The Extended BSBL Framework 4. Experiments 5. Discussions and Conclusions 2

Outline 1. Introduction 2. The Framework of Block Sparse Bayesian Learning (BSBL) 3. The Extended BSBL Framework 4. Experiments 5. Discussions and Conclusions 3

Introduction 4  The basic compressed sensing (CS) model ignores structure in data.  Natural signals (e.g. biosignals, images) have significant structure.  It is shown empirically and theoretically that exploiting such structure may improve recovery performance

Introduction 5  Block Structure is a common structure in many signals Only a few blocks are nonzero  The majority of existing algorithms assumes the block partition is known: Eg. Group Lasso; Mixed L2/L1 Program; Block-OMP; Block-CoSaMP

Introduction 6  Challenges:  Adaptively learn and exploit the intra-block correlation?  When the block partition is unknown?  Only a few algorithms  Some of them still need other a priori knowledge (e.g. the sparsity or block-sparsity)  Only work well in noiseless environments  The correlation in each block is significant in natural signals  No algorithms consider this issue  Any effects of the intra-block correlation?  Can algorithms benefit from the intra-block correlation?  How to adaptively learn?

Introduction 7  Contributions of our work:  Study the effects of the intra-block correlation  Proposed algorithms that can adaptively learn and exploit the intra-block correlation  Based on the framework of block sparse Bayesian learning (bSBL)  Work well no matter whether the block partition is known or unknown  Not significantly harm the performance of most existing algorithms  But can be exploited to improve performance

Outline 8 1. Introduction 2. The Framework of Block Sparse Bayesian Learning (bSBL) 3. The Extended BSBL Framework 4. Experiments 5. Discussions and Conclusions

The BSBL Framework 9  Model:  Prior Parameterized Prior: : control block-sparsity : capture intra-block correlation; will be further constrained to prevent overfitting

The BSBL Framework 10  Model:  Noise model  Posterior

The BSBL Framework 11  All the hyperparameters are estimated by the Type II maximum Likelihood:  Learning rule for

The BSBL Framework 12  All the hyperparameters are estimated by the Type II maximum Likelihood:  Learning rule for  When blocks have the same size: Constrain B i = B, then  When blocks have different sizes: Constrain elements in each block satisfy AR(1) with the same AR coefficient

Outline 1. Introduction 2. The Framework of Block Sparse Bayesian Learning (BSBL) 3. The Extended BSBL Framework 4. Experiments 5. Discussions and Conclusions 13

The Extended BSBL Framework 14  Assume that all the nonzero blocks are of equal size h and are arbitrarily located  Consistent with some practical problems  They can overlap giving rise to larger unequal blocks  The resulting algorithm is not very sensitive to the choice of h, especially in noisy environments  Find the inverse solution when the block partition is unknown

The Extended BSBL Framework 15  Model  Partition x into p identical overlapped blocks ( )  Each block z i satisfies a multivariate Gaussian distribution with the mean given by 0 and the covariance matrix given by  The covariance of the prior x is no longer block-diagonal  Blocks are assumed to be uncorrelated

The Extended BSBL Framework 16  To use the bSBL framework, we want to change the structure of the covariance matrix of the prior as follows:  This corresponds to Now is bSBL model

The Extended BSBL Framework 17  New model  Following the algorithm development in the original bSBL framework, we can directly obtain the algorithm for the above model.

Outline 1. Introduction 2. The Framework of Block Sparse Bayesian Learning (BSBL) 3. The Extended BSBL Framework 4. Experiments 5. Discussions and Conclusions 18

Experiments 19  Experiment 1: Block partition is known in noiseless environments Denote the proposed algorithm by Cluster-SBL (type I) if knowing the block partition, or by Cluster-SBL (type II) if not. N=512, 64 blocks with identical size 10 blocks were nonzero Intra-block correlation varied from 0.9 to 0.99 (modeled as AR(1)) Block-OMP [Eldar, et al,2010] Block-CoSaMP [Baraniuk, et al, 2010] Mixed L2/L1 [Eldar and Mishali,2009] T-MSBL [Zhang and Rao, 2011]

Experiments 20  Experiment 2: Block partition is unknown in noisy environments M=80 N = 256 # of nonzero entries: 32 4 nonzero blocks with random sizes but the total nonzero entries were 32 SNR = 25dB No intra-block correlation (in order to see the feasibility of the extended bSBL framework) For our Cluster-SBL (type ii), h: 3~10 Oracle: LS solution given the true support T-MSBL: [Zhang and Rao, 2011] CluSS-MCMC: [Yu, et al, 2012] DGS: [Huang, et al, 2009]

Experiments 21  Experiment 3: Benefits from exploiting intra-block correlation Figure (a): noiseless M=100, N= blocks with the same size 20 blocks were nonzero block partition was known intra-block correlation varied from 0 to 0.99 Figure (b): The same to the above settings, except the number of nonzero blocks was 15 (making the problem easier)

22