English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

One of the fundamental assumptions of compressive sensing (CS) is that a signal can be reconstructed from a small number of samples by solving an optimization problem with the appropriate regularization term. Two standard regularization terms are the L1 norm and the total variation (TV) norm. We present a comparison of CS reconstruction results based on these two approaches in the context of chemical detection, and we demonstrate that optimization based on the L1 norm outperforms optimization based on the TV norm. Our comparison is driven by CS sampling, reconstruction, and chemical detection in two real-world datasets: the Physical Sciences Inc. Fabry-Perot interferometer sensor multispectral dataset and the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab FTIR-based longwave infrared sensor hyperspectral dataset. Both datasets contain the release of a chemical simulant such as glacial acetic acid, triethyl phosphate, and sulfur hexafluoride. For chemical detection we use the adaptive coherence estimator (ACE) and bulk coherence, and we propose algorithmic ACE thresholds to define the presence or absence of a chemical of interest in both un-compressed data cubes and reconstructed data cubes. The un-compressed data cubes provide an approximate ground truth. We demonstrate that optimization based on either the L1 norm or TV norm results in successful chemical detection at a compression rate of 90%, but we show that L1 optimization is preferable. We present quantitative comparisons of chemical detection on reconstructions from the two methods, with an emphasis on the number of pixels with an ACE value above the threshold.

Total variation vs L1 regularization: a comparison of compressive sensing optimization methods for chemical detection