So IHT does well after all!

Following on the heels of the previous post, I am now comparing recovery performance of the recommended versions (by Maleki and Donoho) of iterative hard thresholding (IHT), and iterative soft thresholding (IST). Click on the image below to see the results.

So, unlike my previous observations (for \(N=250\) and \(m=59\)) here, here, and here, IHT performs quite well, and much better than IST — which is confirmed by Maleki and Donoho. Most of these are within those I see for CMP and OMP with the exceptions of Bernoulli.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s