The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Near-Optimal Signal Recovery From Random Projections: Universal Encoding Strategies?
Open accessAbstract
Suppose we are given a vector $f$ in a class ${\cal F} \subset{\BBR}^N$ , e.g., a class of digital signals or digital images. How many linear measurements do we need to make about $f$ to be able to recover $f$ to within precision $\epsilon$ in the Euclidean $(\ell_2)$ metric? This paper shows that if the objects of interest are sparse in a fixed basis or compressible, then it is possible to reconstruct $f$ to within very high accuracy from a small number of random measurements by solving a simple linear program. More precisely, suppose that the $n$ th largest entry of the vector $\vert f\vert$ (or of its coefficients in a fixed basis) obeys $\vert f\vert _{(n)} \le R \cdot n^{-1/p}$ , where $R > 0$ and $p > 0$ . Suppose that we take measurements $y_k = \langle f, X_k\rangle, k = 1, \ldots, K$ , where the $X_k$ are $N$ -dimensional Gaussian vectors with independent standard normal entries. Then for each $f$ obeying the decay estimate above for some $0 < p < 1$ and with overwhelming probability, our reconstruction $f^\sharp$ , defined as the solution to the constraints $y_k = \langle f^\sharp, X_k \rangle$ with minimal $\ell_1$ norm, obeys $$ \Vert f - f^\sharp\Vert _{\ell_2} \le C_p \cdot R \cdot (K/\log N)^{-r}, \quad r = 1/p - 1/2. $$ There is a sense in which this result is optimal; it is generally impossible to obtain a higher accuracy from any set of $K$ measurements whatsoever. The methodology extends to various other random measurement ensembles; for example, we show that similar results hold if one observes a few randomly sampled Fourier coefficients of $f$ . In fact, the results are quite general and require only two hypotheses on the measurement ensemble which are detailed.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Donoho, D. L. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Information Theory · doi:10.1109/tit.2006.871582 · Cited by 23,994
Boyd, S., Parikh, N., Chu, E., Peleato, B., & Eckstein, J. (2011) · Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning · doi:10.1561/2200000016 · Cited by 17,075
An Introduction To Compressive Sampling
Candes, E. J., & Wakin, M. B. (2008) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2007.914731 · Cited by 10,017
Stable signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate measurements
Candès, E. J., Romberg, J. K., & Tao, T. (2006) · Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics · doi:10.1002/cpa.20124 · Cited by 7,036
Self-citationMagnetic resonance fingerprinting
Ma, D., Gulani, V., Seiberlich, N., Liu, K., Sunshine, J. L., Duerk, J. L., & Griswold, M. A. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11971 · Cited by 1,577
Metadata
- Authors
- Candes, E. J., & Tao, T.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Information Theory
- Published
- 2006-12
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 5406-5425
- ISSN
- 0018-9448 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2129638195
- Cited by
- 6,839
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 215.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Near-Optimal Signal Recovery From Random Projections: Universal Encoding Strategies? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tit.2006.885507
- The paper
- Candes, E. J., & Tao, T. (2006). Near-Optimal Signal Recovery From Random Projections: Universal Encoding Strategies? IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. https://doi.org/10.1109/tit.2006.885507
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.