Additive energy, uncertainty principle and signal recovery mechanisms

Fuente: arXiv
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Aldahleh, K., Iosevich, A., Iosevich, J., Jaimangal, J., Mayeli, A., Pack, S.
Format: Preprint
Published: 2025
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866917992482209792
author Aldahleh, K.
Iosevich, A.
Iosevich, J.
Jaimangal, J.
Mayeli, A.
Pack, S.
author_facet Aldahleh, K.
Iosevich, A.
Iosevich, J.
Jaimangal, J.
Mayeli, A.
Pack, S.
contents Given a signal $f:G\to\mathbb{C}$, where $G$ is a finite abelian group, under what reasonable assumptions can we guarantee the exact recovery of $f$ from a proper subset of its Fourier coefficients? In 1989, Donoho and Stark established a result \cite{DS89} using the classical uncertainty principle, which states that $|\text{supp}(f)|\cdot|\text{supp}(\hat{f})|\geq |G|$ for any nonzero signal $f$. Another result, first proven by Santose and Symes \cite{SS86}, was based on the Logan phenomenon \cite{L65}. In particular, the result showcases how the $L^1$ and $L^2$ minimizing signals with matching Fourier frequencies often recovers the original signal. The purpose of this paper is to relate these recovery mechanisms to additive energy, a combinatorial measure denoted and defined by $$Λ(A)=\left| \left\{ (x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4) \in A^4 \mid x_1 + x_2 = x_3 + x_4 \right\} \right|,$$ where $A\subset\mathbb{Z}_N^d$. In the first part of this paper, we use combinatorial techniques to establish an improved variety of the uncertainty principle in terms of additive energy. In a similar fashion as the Donoho-Stark argument, we use this principle to establish an often stronger recovery condition. In the latter half of the paper, we invoke these combinatorial methods to demonstrate two $L^p$ minimizing recovery results.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2504_14702
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Additive energy, uncertainty principle and signal recovery mechanisms
Aldahleh, K.
Iosevich, A.
Iosevich, J.
Jaimangal, J.
Mayeli, A.
Pack, S.
Classical Analysis and ODEs
Information Theory
94A12, 42B10
Given a signal $f:G\to\mathbb{C}$, where $G$ is a finite abelian group, under what reasonable assumptions can we guarantee the exact recovery of $f$ from a proper subset of its Fourier coefficients? In 1989, Donoho and Stark established a result \cite{DS89} using the classical uncertainty principle, which states that $|\text{supp}(f)|\cdot|\text{supp}(\hat{f})|\geq |G|$ for any nonzero signal $f$. Another result, first proven by Santose and Symes \cite{SS86}, was based on the Logan phenomenon \cite{L65}. In particular, the result showcases how the $L^1$ and $L^2$ minimizing signals with matching Fourier frequencies often recovers the original signal. The purpose of this paper is to relate these recovery mechanisms to additive energy, a combinatorial measure denoted and defined by $$Λ(A)=\left| \left\{ (x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4) \in A^4 \mid x_1 + x_2 = x_3 + x_4 \right\} \right|,$$ where $A\subset\mathbb{Z}_N^d$. In the first part of this paper, we use combinatorial techniques to establish an improved variety of the uncertainty principle in terms of additive energy. In a similar fashion as the Donoho-Stark argument, we use this principle to establish an often stronger recovery condition. In the latter half of the paper, we invoke these combinatorial methods to demonstrate two $L^p$ minimizing recovery results.
title Additive energy, uncertainty principle and signal recovery mechanisms
topic Classical Analysis and ODEs
Information Theory
94A12, 42B10
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.14702