A new construction of compressed sensing matrices for signal processing via vector spaces over finite fields

  • Yingmo Jie
  • Mingchu Li
  • Cheng GuoEmail author
  • Bin Feng
  • Tingting Tang


As an emerging sampling technique, Compressed Sensing provides a quite masterly approach to data acquisition. Compared with the traditional method, how to conquer the Shannon/Nyquist sampling theorem has been fundamentally resolved. In this paper, first, we provide deterministic constructions of sensing matrices based on vector spaces over finite fields. Second, we analyze two kinds of attributes of sensing matrices. One is the recovery performance with respect to compressing and recovering signals in terms of restricted isometry property. In particular, we obtain a series of binary sensing matrices with sparsity level that are quite better than some existing ones. In order to save the storage space and accelerate the recovery process of signals, another character sparsity of matrices has been taken into account. Third, we merge our binary matrices with some matrices owning low coherence in terms of an embedding manipulation to obtain the improved matrices still having low coherence. Finally, compared with the quintessential binary matrices, the improved matrices possess better character of compressing and recovering signals. The favorable performance of our binary and improved matrices have been demonstrated by numerical simulations.


Compressed sensing matrices Vector spaces Coherence Restricted isometry property Signal processing 



This paper is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under grant No. 61501080, 61572095, 61871064, 61877007, 61771090, the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities under No. DUT19JC08, and the Guangxi Key Laboratory of Trusted Software under No. kx201903.


  1. 1.
    Amini A, Marvasti F (2011) Deterministic construction of binary, bipolar and ternary compressed sensing matrices. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 57(4):2360–2370MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amini A, Montazerhodjat V, Marvasti F (2012) Matrices with small coherence using p-ary block codes. IEEE Trans Signal Process 60(1):172–181MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Applebaum L, Howard S, Searle S, Calderbank R (2009) Chirp sensing codes: deterministic compressed sensing measurements for fast recovery. Appl Comput Harmon Anal 26(2):283–290MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baraniuk R (2007) Compressive sensing. IEEE Signal Process Mag 24:118–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berinde R, Gilbert A, Indyk P, Karloff H, Strauss M (2008) Combining geometry and combinatorics: a unified approach to sparse signal recovery. In: Proc. of 46th Annu. Allerton Conf. Commun., Control, Comput., p 798–805Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bourgain J, Dilworth S, Ford K, Konyagin S, Kutzarova D (2011) Explicit constructions of RIP matrices and related problems. Duke Math J 159(1):145–185MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Calderbank R, Howard S, Jafarpour S (2010) Construction of a large class of deterministic sensing matrices that satisfy a statistical isometry property. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 4(2):358–374Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Candes E (2006) Compressive sampling. Proc Int Congr Mathematicians 3:1433–1452MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Candes E (2008) The restricted isometry property and its implications for compressed sensing. CR Acad Sci Paris 346(9–10):589–592MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Candes E, Tao T (2005) Decoding by linear programming. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 51(12):4203–4215MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Candes E, Tao T (2006) Near-optimal signal recovery from random projections: universal encoding strategies. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 52(12):5406–5425MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Candes E, Romberg J, Tao T (2006) Stable signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate measurement. Commun Pure Appl Math 59(8):1207–1223MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Candes E, Romberg J, Tao T (2006) Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 52(2):489–509MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen T-S, Kuo H-C, Wu A-Y (2019) A 232–1996-kS/s robust compressive sensing reconstruction engine for real-time physiological signals monitoring. IEEE J Solid State Circuits 54(1):307–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cohen A, Dahmen W, DeVore R (2009) Compressed sensing and best k-term approximation. J Am Math Soc 22(1):211–231MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cuomo S, De Michele P, Piccialli F (2018) A (multi) GPU iterative reconstruction algorithm based on hessian penalty term for sparse MRI. Int J Grid Utility Comput 9(2):139–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dai W, Milenkovic O (2009) Subspace pursuit for compressive sensing signal reconstruction. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 55(5):2230–2249MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Davenport M, Wakin M (2009) Analysis of orthogonal matching pursuit using the restricted isometry property. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 56(9):4395–4401MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    DeVore R (2007) Deterministic constructions of compressed sensing matrices. J Complex 23(4–6):918–925MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Donoho D (2006) Compressed sensing. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 52(4):1289–1306MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Donoho D, Tsaig Y, Drori I, Starck J (2006) Sparse solution of underdetermined linear equations by stagewise orthogonal matching pursuit. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 58(2):1094–1121MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gilbert A, Indyk P (2010) Sparse recovery using sparse matrices. Proc IEEE 98(6):937–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Huh J-H, Seo K (2016) A typeface searching technique using evaluation functions for shapes and positions of alphabets used in ancient books for image searching. Int J Hybrid Inf Technol 9(9):283–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ionin Y, Kaharaghani H (2007) Balanced generalized weighing matrices and conference matrices. In: The CRC handbook of combinatorial designs, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 306–313Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jie Y, Guo C, Fu Z (2016) Newly deterministic construction of compressed sensing matrices via singular linear spaces over finite fields. J Comb Optim 34(1):245–256MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jie Y, Guo C, Li M, Feng B (2018) Construction of compressed sensing matrices for signal processing. Multimed Tools Appl 77(23):30551–30574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Karystinos G, Pados D (2003) New bounds on the total squared correlation and optimum design of DS-CDMA binary signature sets. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 51(1):48–51Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Li X (2010) Research on measurement matrix based on compressed sensing. Beijing Jiaotong University, thesis of Master Degree, p 25–31Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Li S, Ge G (2014) Deterministic construction of sparse sensing matrices via finite geometry. IEEE Trans Signal Process 62(11):2850–2859MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li S, Gao F, Ge G, Zhang S (2012) Deterministic construction of compressed sensing matrices via algebraic curves. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 58(8):5035–5041MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Liu X, Gao Y (2009) Lattices associated with vector spaces over a finite fields. Ars Combin 93:393–402MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liu X, Jie Y (2016) New construction of deterministic compressed sensing matrices via singular linear spaces over finite fields. WSEAS Trans Math 15:176–184Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Natarajan B (1995) Sparse approximate solutions to linear systems. SIAM J Comput 24(2):227–234MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Needell D, Tropp J (2009) CoSaMP: iterative signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate samples. Appl Comput Harmon Anal 26(3):301–321MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Piccialli F, Cuomo S, De Michele P (2013) A regularized MRI image reconstruction based on hessian penalty term on CPU/GPU systems. In: Proc. of Inter. Conf. on Computational Science, p 2643–2646Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ramu Naidu R, Jampana P, Sastry C (2016) Deterministic compressed sensing matrices: construction via euler squares and applications. IEEE Trans Signal Process 64(14):3566–3575MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Romberg J (2008) Imaging via compressive sampling. IEEE Signal Process Mag 25(2):14–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Strohmer T, Heath R (2003) Grassmannian frames with applications to coding and communication. Appl Comput Harmon Anal 14(3):257–275MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Troop J (2004) Greed is good: algorithmic result for sparse approximation. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 50(10):2231–2242MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tropp J, Gilbert A (2007) Signal recovery from random measurements via orthogonal matching pursuit. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 53(12):4655–4666MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tsaig Y, Donoho D (2006) Extensions of compressed sensing. Signal Process 86(3):549–571CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wan Z (2002) Geometry of classical groups over finite fields, 2nd edn. Science, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Welch L (1974) Lower bounds on the maximum cross correlation of signals. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 20(3):397–399CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wootters W, Fields B (1989) Optimal state determination by mutually unbiased measurements. Ann Phys 191(2):363–381MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wu H, Zhang X, Chen W (2012) Measurement matrices in compressed sensing theory. Journal of Military Communication Technology 33(1):90–94Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Xu L, Chen H (2015) Deterministic construction of RIP matrices in compressed sensing from constant weight codes. ScienceWISE, arXiv: 1506.02568Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Yuan Y, Huh J-H (2018) Customized CAD modeling and design of production process for one-person one-clothing mass production system. Electronics 7(11):270 (1-23)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Zhang J, Han G, Fang Y (2015) Deterministic construction of compressed sensing matrices from protograph LDPC codes. IEEE Trans Signal Processing Letters 22(11):1960–1964CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Software TechnologyDalian University of TechnologyDalianPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Key Laboratory for Ubiquitous Network and Service Software of Liaoning ProvinceDalianChina
  3. 3.Guangxi Key Laboratory of Trusted SoftwareGuilin University of Electronic TechnologyGuilinChina
  4. 4.School of Information Science and TechnologyTaishan UniversityTaianChina

Personalised recommendations