↓ Skip to main content

Fast dictionary learning from incomplete data

Overview of attention for article published in arXiv, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Fast dictionary learning from incomplete data
Published in
arXiv, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13634-018-0533-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Valeriya Naumova, Karin Schnass

Abstract

This paper extends the recently proposed and theoretically justified iterative thresholding and K residual means (ITKrM) algorithm to learning dictionaries from incomplete/masked training data (ITKrMM). It further adapts the algorithm to the presence of a low-rank component in the data and provides a strategy for recovering this low-rank component again from incomplete data. Several synthetic experiments show the advantages of incorporating information about the corruption into the algorithm. Further experiments on image data confirm the importance of considering a low-rank component in the data and show that the algorithm compares favourably to its closest dictionary learning counterparts, wKSVD and BPFA, either in terms of computational complexity or in terms of consistency between the dictionaries learned from corrupted and uncorrupted data. To further confirm the appropriateness of the learned dictionaries, we explore an application to sparsity-based image inpainting. There the ITKrMM dictionaries show a similar performance to other learned dictionaries like wKSVD and BPFA and a superior performance to other algorithms based on pre-defined/analytic dictionaries.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 27%
Researcher 5 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Professor 2 9%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 4 18%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 5 23%
Computer Science 5 23%
Physics and Astronomy 2 9%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 5 23%
Unknown 2 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2021.
All research outputs
#6,278,831
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from arXiv
#98,457
of 914,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,656
of 344,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from arXiv
#2,223
of 17,216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 914,984 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,220 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17,216 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.