Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Multi-Dimensional Visual Data Recovery: Scale-Aware Tensor Modeling and Accelerated Randomized Computation

Wenjin Qin, Hailin Wang, Jiangjun Peng, Jianjun Wang, Tingwen Huang

TL;DR

A FCTN-based generalized nonconvex regularization paradigm from the perspective of gradient mapping is proposed, where the model formulation is shifted from unquantized observations to coarse-grained quantized observations and efficient optimization algorithms with convergence guarantees are derived to solve the formulated models.

Abstract

The recently proposed fully-connected tensor network (FCTN) decomposition has demonstrated significant advantages in correlation characterization and transpositional invariance, and has achieved notable achievements in multi-dimensional data processing and analysis. However, existing multi-dimensional data recovery methods leveraging FCTN decomposition still have room for further enhancement, particularly in computational efficiency and modeling capability. To address these issues, we first propose a FCTN-based generalized nonconvex regularization paradigm from the perspective of gradient mapping. Then, reliable and scalable multi-dimensional data recovery models are investigated, where the model formulation is shifted from unquantized observations to coarse-grained quantized observations. Based on the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) framework, we derive efficient optimization algorithms with convergence guarantees to solve the formulated models. To alleviate the computational bottleneck encountered when processing large-scale multi-dimensional data, fast and efficient randomized compression algorithms are devised in virtue of sketching techniques in numerical linear algebra. These dimensionality-reduction techniques serve as the computational acceleration core of our proposed algorithm framework. Theoretical results on approximation error upper bounds and convergence analysis for the proposed method are derived. Extensive numerical experiments illustrate the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed algorithm over other state-of-the-art methods in terms of quantitative metrics, visual quality, and running time.

Multi-Dimensional Visual Data Recovery: Scale-Aware Tensor Modeling and Accelerated Randomized Computation

TL;DR

A FCTN-based generalized nonconvex regularization paradigm from the perspective of gradient mapping is proposed, where the model formulation is shifted from unquantized observations to coarse-grained quantized observations and efficient optimization algorithms with convergence guarantees are derived to solve the formulated models.

Abstract

The recently proposed fully-connected tensor network (FCTN) decomposition has demonstrated significant advantages in correlation characterization and transpositional invariance, and has achieved notable achievements in multi-dimensional data processing and analysis. However, existing multi-dimensional data recovery methods leveraging FCTN decomposition still have room for further enhancement, particularly in computational efficiency and modeling capability. To address these issues, we first propose a FCTN-based generalized nonconvex regularization paradigm from the perspective of gradient mapping. Then, reliable and scalable multi-dimensional data recovery models are investigated, where the model formulation is shifted from unquantized observations to coarse-grained quantized observations. Based on the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) framework, we derive efficient optimization algorithms with convergence guarantees to solve the formulated models. To alleviate the computational bottleneck encountered when processing large-scale multi-dimensional data, fast and efficient randomized compression algorithms are devised in virtue of sketching techniques in numerical linear algebra. These dimensionality-reduction techniques serve as the computational acceleration core of our proposed algorithm framework. Theoretical results on approximation error upper bounds and convergence analysis for the proposed method are derived. Extensive numerical experiments illustrate the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed algorithm over other state-of-the-art methods in terms of quantitative metrics, visual quality, and running time.
Paper Structure (37 sections, 9 theorems, 33 equations, 7 figures, 4 tables, 2 algorithms)

This paper contains 37 sections, 9 theorems, 33 equations, 7 figures, 4 tables, 2 algorithms.

Key Result

Lemma 2.1

(Transpositional Invariance zheng2021fully) Supposing that an order-${N}$ tensor $\bm{\mathcal{X}} \in \mathbb{R}^{I_1 \times I_2 \times \cdots \times I_N}$ has the following FCTN decomposition: ${ \bm{\mathcal{X}} } ={\rm{FCTN}} (\bm{\mathcal{G}}_{1}, \bm{\mathcal{G}}_{2}, \cdots, \bm{\mathcal{G

Figures (7)

  • Figure 1: Visual comparison of various LRTC methods for Face datasets inpainting under $SR=1\%$. From left to right: (a) Ours, (b) FCTNFR, (c) FCTNTC, (d) FCTN-NNM, (e) TRNNM, (f) TCTV, (g) MTTD, (h) EMLCP, (i) WSTNN, (j) METNN, (k) HTNN, (l) OTNN, (m) GTNN-HOC, (n) t-$\epsilon$-LogDet, (o) Observed, (p) Ground-truth.
  • Figure 2: Visual comparison of various LRTC methods for MRI datasets inpainting under $SR=1\%$. From left to right: (a) Ours, (b) FCTNFR, (c) FCTNTC, (d) FCTN-NNM, (e) TRNNM, (f) TCTV, (g) MTTD, (h) EMLCP, (i) WSTNN, (j) METNN, (k) HTNN, (l) OTNN, (m) GTNN-HOC, (n) t-$\epsilon$-LogDet, (o) Observed, (p) Ground-truth.
  • Figure 3: The tensor data type (from left to right are color image, color video, multi-temporal hyperspectral images, magnetic resonance image, face dataset, hyperspectral video, respectively) versus CPU Time and PSNR in LRTC task. The sampling rates are set to be SR$=0.5\%$ and SR$=1\%$, respectively. While maintaining comparable accuracy, the randomized version is on average 9X faster than the deterministic one, and in some individual cases, it achieves up to 20X speedup.
  • Figure 4: Quantitative evaluation MPSNR, MSSIM, MRSE and CPU Time (Second) of various RTC methods on four color videos. X label: (M1) TRNN, (M2) UTNN, (M3) TSPK, (M4) TTLRR, (M5) LNOP, (M6) NRTRM, (M7) BCNRTC, (M8) HWTNN, (M9) HWTSN, (M10) R-HWTSN, (M11) TCTV-RTC, (M12) FCTN-GNRTC, (M13) R1-FCTN-GNRTC, (M14) R2-FCTN-GNRTC. Y label: (Case 1) $SR= 5\%, SNR= 3dB$, (Case 2) $SR= 10 \%, SNR= 3dB$, (Case 3) $SR= 5\%, SNR= 2dB$, (Case 4) $SR= 10 \%, SNR= 2dB$.
  • Figure 5: Visual comparison of various RTC methods for MRSIs inpainting under $(SR, NR)= (0.1, 0.5)$. From left to right: (a) Observed, (b) TRNN, (c) TTNN, (d) TSPK, (e) TTLRR, (f) LNOP, (g) NRTRM, (h) HWTNN, (i) HWTSN, (j) R-HWTSN, (k) TCTV-RTC, (l) FCTN-GNRTC, (m) R1-FCTN-GNRTC, (n) R2-FCTN-GNRTC, (o) Ground-truth.
  • ...and 2 more figures

Theorems & Definitions (14)

  • Definition 2.1
  • Lemma 2.1
  • Theorem 2.1
  • Theorem 3.1
  • Theorem 3.2
  • Theorem 3.3
  • Theorem 3.4
  • Theorem 3.5
  • Theorem 3.6
  • Definition 4.1
  • ...and 4 more