Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

Reconstruction Algorithms in Compressive

Sensing: An Overview

André Luiz Pilastri1,3 and João Manuel R. S. Tavares1,2

1
Faculty of Engineering - University of Porto,
Rua Dr. Roberto Frias s/n, 4200-465 Porto, PORTUGAL
2
LAETA-Laboratório Associado de Energia, Transporte e Aeronáutica (FEUP),
3
PIXEL Research Group - UNEMAT/BRAZIL,
{andre.pilastri,tavares}@fe.up.pt
http://goo.gl/tcg6S7

Abstract. The theory Compressive Sensing (CS) has provided a new

acquisition strategy and recovery with good in the image processing area.
This theory guarantees to recover a signal with high probability from a
reduced sampling rate below the Nyquist-Shannon limit. The problem of
recovering the original signal from the samples consists in solving an op-
timization problem. This article presents an overview of reconstruction
algorithms for sparse signal recovery in CS, these algorithms may be
broadly divided into six types. We have provided a comprehensive sur-
vey of the numerous reconstruction algorithms in CS aiming to achieve
computational efficiency.

Keywords: compressive sensing · reconstruction algorithms · signal re-

covery · image processing · sampling theorem

1 Introduction

In recent years, Compressive Sensing (CS) has attracted considerable attention

in areas of applied mathematics, computer science, and electrical engineering by
suggesting that it may be possible to surpass the traditional limits of sampling
theory. CS is the theory of reconstructing large dimensional signals from a small
number of measurements by taking advantage of the signal sparsity. CS builds
upon the fundamental fact that we can represent many signals using only a
few non-zero coefficients in a suitable basis or dictionary. CS has been widely
used and implemented in many applications including computed tomography
[9], wireless communication [40], image processing [8] and camera design [20].
Conventional approaches to sampling images use Shannon theorem, which
requires signals to be sampled at a rate twice the maximum frequency. This cri-
terion leads to larger storage and bandwidth requirements. Compressive Sensing
(CS) is a novel sampling technique that removes the bottleneck imposed by Shan-
non’s theorem. This theory utilizes sparsity present in the images to recover it
from fewer observations than the traditional methods. It joins the sampling and

DSIE|16 p.127
 Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

compression steps and enables to reconstruct with the only fewer number of
observations.
This property of compressive Sensing provides evident advantages over Nyquist-
Shannon theorem. The image reconstruction algorithms with CS increase the
efficiency of the overall algorithm in reconstructing the sparse signal. There are
various algorithms available for recovery as shown in section 3.

2 Historical Background

In the area of engineering the sampling theorem of Nyquist-Shannon has a

tremendous role e it can be used frequently only for band-limited signals oth-
erwise it requires larger storage space and measurements for high-dimensional
signals [33]. However, practically reconstruction is even possible with fewer mea-
surements and compression is also needed before storage [3]. These requirements
can be fulfilled with CS. The field of CS has gained enormous interest recently.
It is basically developed by D. Donoho, E. Candes, Justin Romberg and T. Tao
[1,11].
In the framework of CS, the signals probed are firstly assumed to be sparse
or compressible in some basis [1,10,12,31,43]. Consider a complex-valued signal
x which itself may or may not be sparse in the canonical basis but is sparse or
approximately sparse in an appropriate basis Ψ . That is,

x = Ψ θ. (1)

where Θ is sparse or approximately sparse. A central idea of the CS the-

ory is about how a signal is acquired: the acquisition of signal x of length n
is carried out by measunring m projections of x onto sensing vectors {ϕTi , i =
1, 2, ..., m} : yi = ϕTi x for i = 1, 2, ..., m. For sensing efficiency, we wish to collect
a relatively much smaller number of measurements, that is, one requires that
m be considerably smaller than n (m  n), hence the name CS. This data ac-
quisition mechanism is at the core of a CS system that marks a fundamental
departure from the conventional data acquisition compression transmission de-
compression framework: the conventional framework collects a vast amount of
data for acquiring a high-resolution signal, then essentially discard most of the
data collected (in the Ψ domain) in the compression stage, while in CS the data
is measured in a compressed manner, and the much reduced amount of measure-
ments are transmitted or stored economically, and every bit of the measurements
are then utilized to recover the signal using reconstruction algorithms. The data
acquisition process in CS framework is described by

y = Φx. (2)

According to Eq.(1) and Eq.(2) can be written as y = ΦΨ Θ (the size of

the sparsifying basis or sparse matrix Ψ is n × n). The figure1 illustrates the
relationship between the variables. Typically with (m < n), the inverse problem

p.128 DSIE|16
Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

is ill-posed [29]. However, the sparest solution of Eq.(2) can be obtained by

solving the constrained optimization problem

minimize =k Θ k 0 ; subject to : ΦΨ Θ = y. (3)

Pn
where k Θ k 0 is the l0 norm defined as k Θ k 0 = i=1 | Θi |0 = number of
nonzero components in Θ.
Unfortunately, it turns out that Eq.(3) is a problem of combinatorial com-
plexity: finding solution of Eq.(3) requires enumerating subsets of the dictionary
to identify the smallest subset that can represent signal x, the complexity of such
a subset search grows exponentially with the signal size n [10]. A key result in
the CS theory is that if x is r -sparse, the waveforms in {ϕTi , i = 1, 2, ..., m} are
independent and identically distributed random waveforms, and the number of
measurements, m, satisfies the condition:

m ≥ c· r· log(n/r), (4)

where c is a small positive constant, then signal x can be reconstructed by solving

the convex problem

minimize =k Θ k 1 ; subject to : ΦΨ Θ = y, (5)

Pn
where k Θ k 1 = i=1 | xi | [1].

Fig. 1. (a) Compressive sensing measurement process with a random Gaussian mea-
surement matrix Φ and discrete cosine transform (DCT) matrix Ψ . The vector of co-
efficients s is sparse with K=4. (b) Measurement process with Θ = ΦΨ . There are four
columns that correspond to nonzero si coefficients, the measurement vector y is linear
combination of these columns [1].

3 Reconstruction Algorithms
CS comprises a collection of methods of representing a signal on the basis of
a limited number of measurements and then recovering the signal from these

DSIE|16 p.129
 Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

measurements [35]. The problem of how to effectively recover the original signal
from the compressed data plays a significant role in the CS framework. Cur-
rently, there exists several reconstruction algorithms which are defined either in
the context of convex optimization, or greedy approaches, among them we can
mention [1,6,10,12,35,37,42].
To present an overview of reconstruction algorithms for sparse signal recovery
in compressive sensing, these algorithms may be broadly divided into six types
as show in Fig.2.

M. BPDN

SBLA BPDN

IRLS

LASSO
Basis
Monte- Pursuit
Carlo
Non-convex
FOCUSS

IHT Convex
Relaxation
NNm
Belief
Propa-
gation

Iterative
Thresholding
Message
SMP Gradient
Passing
Pursuit
Tree MP

Sequential Reconstruction
EMP
Algorithms
IST MP

Greedy
Subspace
Pursuit

Bregman
Iterative
OMP

CoSAMP
Regularized
OMP

Combinatorial
OMMP

Stagewise
OMP
FSA CP

HHS

Fig. 2. Compressive Sensing: Reconstruction Algorithms and their Classification

adapted from [37].

3.1 Convex Relaxation

With the development of fast methods of Linear Programming in the eighties,
the idea of convex relaxation became truly promising. It was put forward most
enthusiastically and successfully by Donoho and his collaborators since the late
eighties [35,39].
This class algorithms solve a convex optimization problem through linear
programming [12] to obtain reconstruction. The number of measurements re-
quired for exact reconstruction is small but methods are computationally com-

p.130 DSIE|16
Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

plex. Basis Pursuit [14], Basis Pursuit De-Noising (BPDN) [14], Least Abso-
lute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) [41] e Least Angle Regression
(LARS) [21] are some examples of such algorithms. Basis Pursuit is a principle
for decomposing a signal into an ”optimal” superposition of dictionary elements,
where optimal means having the smallest l1 norm of coefficients among all such
decompositions.
Basis Pursuit has interesting relations to ideas in areas as diverse as ill-posed
problems, abstract harmonic analysis, total variation denoising, and multiscale
edge denoising. Basis Pursuit in highly overcomplete dictionaries leads to large-
scale optimization problems. Such problems can be attacked successfully only
because of recent advances in linear and quadratic programming by interior-
point methods.
In the paper [41] Lasso (l1 ) penalties are useful for fitting a wide variety
of models. Newly developed computational algorithms allow application of these
models to large data sets, exploiting sparsity for both statistical and computation
gains. Interesting work on the lasso is being carried out in many fields, including
statistics, engineering, mathematics and computer science. Recent works show
matrix versions of signal recovery called ||M ||1 Nuclear Norm minimization [38].
Instead of reconstructing × from Θx, Nuclear Norm minimization tries to recover
a low rank matrix M from Θx. Since rank determines the order, dimension and
complexity of the system, low rank matrices correspond to low order statistical
models.

3.2 Non Convex Minimization Algorithms

Many practical problems of importance are non-convex, and most non-convex
problems are hard (if not impossible) to solve exactly in a reasonable time. Hence
the idea of using heuristic algorithms, which may or may not produce desired
solutions.
In alternate minimization techniques, the optimization is carried out with
some variables are held fixed in cyclical fashion and linearization techniques, in
which the objectives and constraints are linearized (or approximated by a con-
vex function). Other techniques include search algorithms (such as genetic algo-
rithms), which rely on simple solution update rules to progress. There are many
algorithm proposed in literature that use this technique like Focal Underde-
termined System Solution (FOCUSS) [34], Iterative Re-weighted Least Squares
[13], Sparse Bayesian Learning algorithms [44], Monte-Carlo based algorithms
[27]. Non-convex optimization is mostly utilized in medical imaging tomography,
network state inference, streaming data reduction.

3.3 Greedy Iterative Algorithm

Due to the fast reconstruction and low complexity of mathematical framework, a
family of iterative greedy algorithms has been widely used in compressive sensing
recently [19]. This class algorithms solve the reconstruction problem by finding
the answer, step by step, in an iterative fashion.

DSIE|16 p.131
 Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

The fast and accurate reconstruction algorithms has been the focus of the
study of CS, they will be the key technologies for the application of CS. At
present, the most important greedy algorithms include matching pursuit and
gradient pursuit [18,19].
The idea is to select columns of Θ in a greedy fashion. At each iteration,
the column of Θ that correlates most with is selected. Conversely, least square
error is minimized in every iteration. Most used greedy algorithms are Matching
Pursuit [32] and its derivative Orthogonal Matching Pursuits(OMP) [42] because
of their low implementation cost and high speed of recovery. However, when the
signal is not much sparse, recovery becomes costly. For such situations, improved
versions of (OMP) have been devised like Regularized OMP [36], Stagewise OMP
[18], Compressive Sampling Matching Pursuits(CoSaMP) [35], Subspace Pursuits
[15], Gradient Pursuits [22] and Orthogonal Multiple Matching Pursuit [30].

3.4 Combinatorial / Sublinear Algorithms

This class of algorithms recovers sparse signal through group testing. They are
extremely fast and efficient, as compared to convex relaxation or greedy algo-
rithms but require specific pattern in the measurements, Φ needs to be sparse.
Representative algorithms are Fourier Sampling Algorithm [24], Chaining Pur-
suit proper is an iterative algorithm [25], Heavy Hitters on Steroids (HHS) [26].

3.5 Iterative Thresholding Algorithms

Iterative approaches to CS recovery problem are faster than the convex optimiza-
tion problems. For this class of algorithms, correct measurements are recovered
by soft or hard thresholding [7], [16] starting from noisy measurements given the
signal is sparse. The thresholding function depends upon number iterations and
problem setup at hand.
The Iterative Hard Thresholding (IHT) algorithm for the first time was sug-
gested by Blumensath and Davies for recovery in compressed Sensing scenario
[7]. This algorithm can offer the theoretical guarantee with its implementation
which can be shown in the particular one [23]. The basic idea of IHT is to chase
a good candidate for the estimate of support set which fits the measurement.
The IHT algorithm is an algorithm with a simple implementation.
Message Passing(MP) algorithms [17] are an important modification of iter-
ative thresholding algorithms in which basic variables (messages) are associated
with directed graph edges. A relevant graph in case of Compressive Sensing is
the bipartite graph with n nodes on one side (variable nodes) and m nodes on the
other side (the measurement nodes). This distributed approach has many advan-
tages like low computational complexity and easy implementation in parallel or
distributed manner. Expander Matching Pursuits [28], Sparse Matching Pursuits
[5] and Sequential Sparse Matching Pursuits [4] are recently proposed algorithms
in this domain that achieve near-linear recovery time while using O(s.log(n/s))
measurements only. Recently, proposed algorithm of Belief Propagation also falls
in this category [2].

p.132 DSIE|16
Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

3.6 Bregman Iterative Algorithms

Bregman method is an iterative algorithm to solve certain convex optimiza-

tion problems. These algorithms provide a simple and efficient way of solving
l1 minimization problem. [45] presents a new idea which gives exact solution
of constrained problems by iteratively solving a sequence of unconstrained sub-
problems generated by a Bregman iterative regularization scheme. When applied
to CS problems, the iterative approach using Bregman distance regularization
achieves reconstruction in four to six iterations [45]. The computational speed
of these algorithms are particularly appealing compared to that available with
other existing algorithms. There are various algorithms available for recovery.
In the Table 1, we have listed some reconstruction algorithms complexity
measures for Compressive Sensing.

Table 1. Complexity and Minimum Measurement requirement of Compressive Sensing

Reconstruction Algorithms.

Algorithm Complexity Minimum Measurement

3
Basis Pursuit [14], [15] O(n ) O(s log n)
OMP [15], [36], [42] O(s m n) O(s log n)
StOMP [18] O(n log n) O(n log n)
ROMP [35], [36] O(s m n) O(s log 2 n)
CoSAMP [36] O(m n) O(s log n)
Subspace Pursuits [15] O(s m n) O(s log (n/s))
EMP [28] O(s log (n/s)) O(s log (n/s))
SMP [5] O(s log (n/s) log R) O(s log (n/s))
Belief Propagation [2] O(n log 2 n) O(s log n)
Chaining Pursuits [25] O(s log 2 n log 2 s) O(s log 2 n)
HHS [26] O(s polylog(n)) O(poly(s,log n))

In paper [15] and [18], Basis Pursuit can reliably recover signals with n =
256 and sparsity level up to 35, from only 128 measurements. The reconstruction
algorithms OMP and ROMP can only be reliable up to sparsity level of 19 for
same n and m. The performance of Basis Pursuit appears promising as compared
to OMP derivatives from minimum measurements perspective.

4 Conclusion

Broadly speaking, the theory of Compressive Sensing sub-sample consists of a

signal and then use a reconstruction algorithm based on optimization to re-
build it. This property of compressive Sensing provides evident advantages over
Nyquist-Shannon theorem. The image reconstruction algorithms with CS in-
crease the efficiency of the overall algorithm in reconstructing the sparse signal.

DSIE|16 p.133
 Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

During the review process did the survey and identify six types of recon-
struction algorithms classes. In this article, we have provided a comprehensive
survey of the numerous reconstruction algorithms discusses the origin, purpose,
scope and implementation of CS in image reconstruction and compares their
complexity.

5 Acknowledgments
The author gratefully acknowledges ”Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento
Cientfico e Tecnologia - CNPq” for the scholarship provided during this research.

References
1. Baraniuk, R.: Compressive Sensing [Lecture Notes]. IEEE Signal Processing Mag-
azine 24(4), 118–121 (jul 2007), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs{_}all.
jsp?arnumber=4286571{&}tag=1
2. Baron, D., Sarvotham, S., Baraniuk, R.G.: Bayesian compressive sensing via belief
propagation. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 58(1), 269–280 (2010), http:
//ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs{_}all.jsp?arnumber=5169989
3. Bayar, B., Bouaynaya, N., Shterenberg, R.: Kernel reconstruction: An exact greedy
algorithm for compressive sensing. In: 2014 IEEE Global Conference on Signal
and Information Processing (GlobalSIP). pp. 1390–1393. IEEE (dec 2014), http:
//ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/wrapper.htm?arnumber=7032355
4. Berinde, R., Indyk, P.: Sequential sparse matching pursuit. In: 2009 47th An-
nual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing, Allerton
2009. pp. 36–43. IEEE, Monticello, IL (2009), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/
articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=5394834{&}tag=1
5. Berinde, R., Indyk, P., Ružić, M.: Practical near-optimal sparse recovery in
the L1 norm. In: 46th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control,
and Computing. pp. 198–205. IEEE (2008), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/
abs{_}all.jsp?arnumber=4797556
6. Blumensath, T., Davies, M.E.: Iterative Hard Thresholding for Compressed Sens-
ing. Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis 27(3), 265–274 (may 2008),
http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.0510
7. Blumensath, T., Davies, M.E.: Iterative hard thresholding for compressed sensing.
Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis 27(3), 265–274 (nov 2009), http:
//www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1063520309000384
8. Bobin, J., Starck, J.L., Ottensamer, R.: Compressed Sensing in Astronomy (feb
2008), http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSTSP.2008.2005337
9. Candès, E., Romberg, J., Tao, T.: Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal re-
construction from highly incomplete frequency information. IEEE Transactions
on Information Theory 52(2), 489–509 (feb 2006), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/
lpdocs/epic03/wrapper.htm?arnumber=1580791
10. Candès, E., Romberg, J.: L1-magic: Recovery of Sparse Signals via Convex Pro-
gramming (2005), http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.
1.212.9120
11. Candes, E., Tao, T.: Near Optimal Signal Recovery From Random Projections:
Universal Encoding Strategies? (oct 2004), http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0410542

p.134 DSIE|16
Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

12. Candès, E.J., Recht, B.: Exact matrix completion via convex optimization.
Foundations of Computational Mathematics 9(6), 717–772 (2009), http://link.
springer.com/article/10.1007/s10208-009-9045-5
13. Chartrand, R., Yin, W.: Iteratively reweighted algorithms for compressive sens-
ing. In: ICASSP, IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal
Processing - Proceedings. pp. 3869–3872. Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing,
2008. ICASSP 2008. IEEE International Conference on, Las Vegas, NV (2008),
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs{_}all.jsp?arnumber=4518498
14. Chen, S.S., Donoho, D.L., Saunders, M.A.: Atomic Decomposition by
Basis Pursuit. SIAM Rev. 43(1), 129–159 (2001), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1137/S003614450037906Xhttp://epubs.siam.org/doi/abs/10.1137/
S003614450037906X
15. Dai, W., Milenkovic, O.: Subspace pursuit for compressive sensing signal recon-
struction. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 55(5), 2230–2249 (2009),
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=4839056
16. Donoho, D.L.: De-noising by soft-thresholding. IEEE Transactions on Infor-
mation Theory 41(3), 613–627 (1995), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/
articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=382009&newsearch=true&queryText=10.1109%
2F18.382009
17. Donoho, D.L., Maleki, A., Montanari, A.: Message Passing Algorithms for Com-
pressed Sensing p. 6 (2009), http://arxiv.org/abs/0907.3574http://arxiv.
org/pdf/0907.3574v1.pdf
18. Donoho, D.L., Tsaig, Y., Drori, I., Starck, J.L.: Sparse solution of underdeter-
mined systems of linear equations by stagewise orthogonal matching pursuit. IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory 58(2), 1094–1121 (2012), http://citeseer.
ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.115.5221
19. Du, L., Wang, R., Wan, W., Yu, X.Q., Yu, S.: Analysis on greedy reconstruction
algorithms based on compressed sensing. In: 2012 International Conference on
Audio, Language and Image Processing. pp. 783–789. IEEE (jul 2012), http://
ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/wrapper.htm?arnumber=6376720
20. Duarte, M., Davenport, M., Takhar, D., Laska, J., Ting Sun, Kelly, K., Bara-
niuk, R.: Single-Pixel Imaging via Compressive Sampling. IEEE Signal Process-
ing Magazine 25(2), 83–91 (mar 2008), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/
epic03/wrapper.htm?arnumber=4472247
21. Efron, B., Hastie, T., Johnstone, I., Tibshirani, R., Ishwaran, H., Knight, K.,
Loubes, J.M., Massart, P., Madigan, D., Ridgeway, G., Rosset, S., Zhu, J.I.,
Stine, R.a., Turlach, B.a., Weisberg, S., Hastie, T., Johnstone, I., Tibshirani,
R.: Least angle regression. Annals of Statistics 32(2), 407–499 (2004), http:
//arxiv.org/pdf/math/0406456v2.pdf
22. Figueiredo, M.A.T., Nowak, R.D., Wright, S.J.: Gradient projection for sparse
reconstruction: Application to compressed sensing and other inverse problems.
IEEE Journal on Selected Topics in Signal Processing 1(4), 586–597 (2007),
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs{_}all.jsp?arnumber=4407762
23. Foucart, S.: Sparse Recovery Algorithms: Sufficient Conditions in Terms of Re-
stricted Isometry Constants. In: Approximation Theory XIII: San Antonio 2010,
pp. 65–77. Springer New York (2012), http://link.springer.com/10.1007/
978-1-4614-0772-0{_}5
24. Gilbert, A.C., Muthukrishnan, S., Strauss, M.: Improved time bounds for near-
optimal sparse Fourier representations. In: Papadakis, M., Laine, A.F., Unser,
M.A. (eds.) Proceedings of SPIE. vol. 5914, pp. 59141A–59141A–15. Proc. SPIE

DSIE|16 p.135
 Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

Wavelets XI (aug 2005), http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=

10.1.1.2.7187
25. Gilbert, A.C., Strauss, M.J., Tropp, J.A., Vershynin, R.: Algorithmic linear di-
mension reduction in the l 1 norm for sparse vectors. In: 44th Annual Allerton
Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing. Allerton 2006 (2006),
http://arxiv.org/pdf/cs/0608079v1.pdfhttp://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0608079
26. Gilbert, A.C., Strauss, M.J., Tropp, J.A., Vershynin, R.: One sketch for
all: fast algorithms for compressed sensing. Proceedings of the thirty-ninth
annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing - STOC ’07 pp. 237–
246 (2007), http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1250790.1250824http:
//dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1250824
27. Godsill, S.J., Cemgil, A.T., Févotte, C., Wolfe, P.J.: Bayesian computational meth-
ods for sparse audio and music processing. In: European Signal Processing Con-
ference. pp. 345–349 (2007), http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?
doi=10.1.1.330.5395
28. Indyk, P., Ružić, M.: Near-Optimal Sparse Recovery in the L 1 Norm. pp. 199–207
(2008), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs{_}all.jsp?arnumber=4690954
29. Jalali, S., Maleki, A., Baraniuk, R.: Minimum Complexity Pursuit for Universal
Compressed Sensing http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.5814
30. Liu, E., Temlyakov, V.N.: The orthogonal super greedy algorithm and applications
in compressed sensing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 58(4), 2040–2047
(2012), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs{_}all.jsp?arnumber=6092487
31. Lustig, M., Donoho, D.L., Santos, J.M., Pauly, J.M.: Compressed Sensing MRI
(2008)
32. Mallat, S.G., Zhang, Z.: Matching pursuits with time-frequency dic-
tionaries. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 41(12), 3397–3415
(1993), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs{_}all.jsp?arnumber=
258082{&}abstractAccess=no{&}userType=inst
33. Meenakshi, Budhiraja, S.: A Survey of Compressive Sensing Based Greedy Pur-
suit Reconstruction Algorithms. International Journal of Image, Graphics and
Signal Processing 7(10), 1–10 (sep 2015), http://www.mecs-press.org/ijigsp/
ijigsp-v7-n10/v7n10-1.html
34. Murray, J., Kreutz-Delgado, K.: An improved FOCUSS-based learning algorithm
for solving sparse linear inverse problems. Conference Record of Thirty-Fifth Asilo-
mar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers (Cat.No.01CH37256) 1, 347 –
351 (2001), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=
986949{&}abstractAccess=no{&}userType=inst
35. Needell, D., Tropp, J.A.: CoSaMP: Iterative signal recovery from incomplete
and inaccurate samples. Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis 26(3),
301–321 (may 2009), http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S1063520308000638
36. Needell, D., Vershynin, R.: Uniform uncertainty principle and signal recovery via
regularized orthogonal matching pursuit. Foundations of Computational Mathe-
matics 9(3), 317–334 (2009)
37. Qaisar, S., Bilal, R.M., Iqbal, W., Naureen, M., Lee, S.: Compressive sensing:
From theory to applications, a survey. Journal of Communications and Networks
15(5), 443–456 (oct 2013), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.
jsp?arnumber=6674179
38. Recht, B., Fazel, M., Parrilo, P.A.: Guaranteed Minimum-Rank Solutions of Lin-
ear Matrix Equations via Nuclear Norm Minimization. Society for Industrial and
Applied Mathematics 52(3), 471–501 (2007), http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.4138

p.136 DSIE|16
Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium in Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

39. Rudelson, M., Vershynin, R.: Sparse reconstruction by convex relaxation: Fourier
and Gaussian measurements (feb 2006), http://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0602559.
pdf
40. Tauboeck, G., Hlawatsch, F., Eiwen, D., Rauhut, H.: Compressive estimation of
doubly selective channels in multicarrier systems: Leakage effects and sparsity-
enhancing processing http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.2774
41. Tibshirani, R.: Regression Shrinkage and Selection Via the Lasso. Journal of
the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 58, 267—-288 (1996), http://statweb.
stanford.edu/{~}tibs/ftp/lasso-retro.pdf
42. Tropp, J.A., Gilbert, A.C.: Signal Recovery From Random Measurements Via Or-
thogonal Matching Pursuit. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 53(12),
4655–4666 (dec 2007), http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/wrapper.
htm?arnumber=4385788
43. Wang, L., Lu, K., Liu, P., Ranjan, R., Chen, L.: IK-SVD: Dictionary Learning for
Spatial Big Data via Incremental Atom Update (2014)
44. Wipf, D.P., Rao, B.D.: Sparse Bayesian learning for basis selection. IEEE
Transactions on Signal Processing 52(8), 2153–2164 (2004), http://ieeexplore.
ieee.org/xpl/freeabs{_}all.jsp?arnumber=1315936{&}abstractAccess=
no{&}userType=inst
45. Yin, W., Osher, S., Goldfarb, D., Darbon, J.: Bregman Iterative Algorithms for
$ 1$-Minimization with Applications to Compressed Sensing. SIAM Journal on
Imaging Sciences 1(1), 143–168 (jan 2008), http://epubs.siam.org/doi/abs/10.
1137/070703983

DSIE|16 p.137