Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 3,635

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Greed is Good: Algorithmic Results for Sparse Approximation

Tropp, J.A.·2004·IEEE Transactions on Information Theory

Abstract

This article presents new results on using a greedy algorithm, orthogonal matching pursuit (OMP), to solve the sparse approximation problem over redundant dictionaries. It provides a sufficient condition under which both OMP and Donoho's basis pursuit (BP) paradigm can recover the optimal representation of an exactly sparse signal. It leverages this theory to show that both OMP and BP succeed for every sparse input signal from a wide class of dictionaries. These quasi-incoherent dictionaries offer a natural generalization of incoherent dictionaries, and the cumulative coherence function is introduced to quantify the level of incoherence. This analysis unifies all the recent results on BP and extends them to OMP. Furthermore, the paper develops a sufficient condition under which OMP can identify atoms from an optimal approximation of a nonsparse signal. From there, it argues that OMP is an approximation algorithm for the sparse problem over a quasi-incoherent dictionary. That is, for every input signal, OMP calculates a sparse approximant whose error is only a small factor worse than the minimal error that can be attained with the same number of terms.

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.2004.834793

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
Tropp, J. A.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory
Published
2004-10
Volume
50
Issue
10
Pages
2231-2242
ISSN
0018-9448 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2116148865
Cited by
3,635
References
0
FWCI
75.86
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.