Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 673

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A generalized uncertainty principle and sparse representation in pairs of bases

Elad, M., Bruckstein, A.M.·2002·IEEE Transactions on Information Theory

Abstract

An elementary proof of a basic uncertainty principle concerning pairs of representations of R/sup N/ vectors in different orthonormal bases is provided. The result, slightly stronger than stated before, has a direct impact on the uniqueness property of the sparse representation of such vectors using pairs of orthonormal bases as overcomplete dictionaries. The main contribution in this paper is the improvement of an important result due to Donoho and Huo (2001) concerning the replacement of the l/sub 0/ optimization problem by a linear programming (LP) minimization when searching for the unique sparse representation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tit.2002.801410

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Elad, M., & Bruckstein, A. M.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory
Published
2002-09
Volume
48
Issue
9
Pages
2558-2567
ISSN
0018-9448 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2167839759
Cited by
673
References
0
FWCI
23.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.