Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36981398›Full record

ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Compressive Sensing via Variational Bayesian Inference under Two Widely Used Priors: Modeling, Comparison and Discussion.

Mohammad Shekaramiz, Todd K Moon

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mohammad ShekaramizMachine Learning & Drone Lab, Electrical and Computer Engineering Program, Engineering Department, Utah Valley University, 800 West University Parkway, Orem, UT 84058, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1176-3284
Todd K MoonElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, Utah State University, 4120 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7124-0384

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Compressive sensing is a sub-Nyquist sampling technique for efficient signal acquisition and reconstruction of sparse or compressible signals. In order to account for the sparsity of the underlying signal of interest, it is common to use sparsifying priors such as Bernoulli-Gaussian-inverse Gamma (BGiG) and Gaussian-inverse Gamma (GiG) priors on the components of the signal. With the introduction of variational Bayesian inference, the sparse Bayesian learning (SBL) methods for solving the inverse problem of compressive sensing have received significant interest as the SBL methods become more efficient in terms of execution time. In this paper, we consider the sparse signal recovery problem using compressive sensing and the variational Bayesian (VB) inference framework. More specifically, we consider two widely used Bayesian models of BGiG and GiG for modeling the underlying sparse signal for this problem. Although these two models have been widely used for sparse recovery problems under various signal structures, the question of which model can outperform the other for sparse signal recovery under no specific structure has yet to be fully addressed under the VB inference setting. Here, we study these two models specifically under VB inference in detail, provide some motivating examples regarding the issues in signal reconstruction that may occur under each model, perform comparisons and provide suggestions on how to improve the performance of each model.

Indexed as

compressive sensinggraphical Bayesian representationhyperparametersprior modelingsignal recoverysparse Bayesian learningvariational Bayes inference

Identifiers

PMID36981398
PMCPMC10047912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read11
table measurements read7
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.