Optimal linear compression under unreliable representation and robust PCA neural models

In a typical linear data compression system the representation variables resulting from the coding operation are assumed totally reliable and therefore the solution in the mean-squared-error sense is an orthogonal projector to the so-called principal component subspace. When the representation variables are contaminated by additive noise which is uncorrelated with the signal, the problem is called noisy principal component analysis (NPCA) and the optimal MSE solution is not a trivial extension of PCA. We first show that the problem is not well defined unless we impose explicit or implicit constraints on either the coding or the decoding operator. Second, orthogonality is not a property of the optimal solution under most constraints. Third, the signal components may or may not be reconstructed depending on the noise level. As the noise power increases, we observe rank reduction in the optimal solution under most reasonable constraints. In these cases it appears that it is preferable to omit the smaller signal components rather than attempting to reconstruct them. This phenomenon has similarities with classical information theoretical results, notably the water-filling analogy, found in parallel additive Gaussian noise channels. Finally, we show that standard Hebbian-type PCA learning algorithms are not optimally robust to noise, and propose a new Hebbian-type learning algorithm which is optimally robust in the NPCA sense.

[1]  Mark D. Plumbley Efficient information transfer and anti-Hebbian neural networks , 1993, Neural Networks.

[2]  Konstantinos I. Diamantaras Robust hebbian learning and noisy principal component analysis , 1998, Int. J. Comput. Math..

[3]  D. A. Bell,et al.  Information Theory and Reliable Communication , 1969 .

[4]  P. Foldiak,et al.  Adaptive network for optimal linear feature extraction , 1989, International 1989 Joint Conference on Neural Networks.

[5]  Michael G. Strintzis,et al.  Noisy PCA theory and application in filter bank codec design , 1997, 1997 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[6]  Harold J. Kushner,et al.  wchastic. approximation methods for constrained and unconstrained systems , 1978 .

[7]  S.Y. Kung,et al.  Adaptive Principal component EXtraction (APEX) and applications , 1994, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[8]  Kurt Hornik,et al.  Learning in linear neural networks: a survey , 1995, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[9]  E. Capaldi,et al.  The organization of behavior. , 1992, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[10]  D. Signorini,et al.  Neural networks , 1995, The Lancet.

[11]  H. Hotelling Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. , 1933 .

[12]  K. I. Diamantaras Robust principal component extracting neural networks , 1996, Proceedings of International Conference on Neural Networks (ICNN'96).

[13]  E. Oja Simplified neuron model as a principal component analyzer , 1982, Journal of mathematical biology.

[14]  D. F. Morrison,et al.  Multivariate Statistical Methods , 1968 .

[15]  Erkki Oja,et al.  Neural Networks, Principal Components, and Subspaces , 1989, Int. J. Neural Syst..

[16]  Terence D. Sanger,et al.  Optimal unsupervised learning in a single-layer linear feedforward neural network , 1989, Neural Networks.

[17]  Tamer Basar,et al.  Analysis of Recursive Stochastic Algorithms , 2001 .

[18]  Ralph Linsker,et al.  An Application of the Principle of Maximum Information Preservation to Linear Systems , 1988, NIPS.