Convolution systems on discrete abelian groups as a unifying strategy in sampling theory
Antonio G. Garc\'ia, Miguel A. Hern\'andez-Medina, Gerardo, P\'erez-Villal\'on

TL;DR
This paper develops a unified sampling theory framework using convolution systems on discrete abelian groups, extending classical and average sampling methods to more general group-invariant subspaces in Hilbert spaces.
Contribution
It introduces a general sampling approach based on group representations, encompassing classical and non-abelian group cases like crystallographic groups.
Findings
Unified sampling framework for abelian and non-abelian groups
Generalizes classical average and pointwise sampling methods
Applicable to shift-invariant and group-invariant subspaces
Abstract
A regular sampling theory in a multiply generated unitary invariant subspace of a separable Hilbert space is proposed. This subspace is associated to a unitary representation of a countable discrete abelian group on . The samples are defined by means of a filtering process which generalizes the usual sampling settings. The multiply generated setting allows to consider some examples where the group is non-abelian as, for instance, crystallographic groups. Finally, it is worth to mention that classical average or pointwise sampling in shift-invariant subspaces are particular examples included in the followed approach.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Convolution systems on discrete abelian groups as a unifying strategy in sampling theory
A. G. García, M. A. Hernández-Medina ** and G. Pérez-Villalón** E-mail:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]
Abstract
A regular sampling theory in a multiply generated unitary invariant subspace of a separable Hilbert space is proposed. This subspace is associated to a unitary representation of a countable discrete abelian group on . The samples are defined by means of a filtering process which generalizes the usual sampling settings. The multiply generated setting allows to consider some examples where the group is non-abelian as, for instance, crystallographic groups. Finally, it is worth to mention that classical average or pointwise sampling in shift-invariant subspaces are particular examples included in the followed approach.
Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Avda. de la Universidad 30, 28911 Leganés-Madrid, Spain.
- †
Information Processing and Telecommunications Center, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Departamento de Matemática Aplicada a las Tecnologías de la Información y las Comunicaciones, E.T.S.I.T., Avda. Complutense 30, 28040 Madrid, Spain.
- ‡
Departamento de Matemática Aplicada a las Tecnologías de la Información y las Comunicaciones, E.T.S.I.T., Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Nicola Tesla s/n, 28031 Madrid, Spain.
Keywords: Discrete abelian groups; unitary representation of a group; convolution systems; dual frames; sampling expansion.
AMS: 42C15; 94A20; 22B05; 20H15.
1 Introduction
In this paper we propose a regular sampling theory for a multiply generated -invariant subspace of a separable Hilbert space . By regular sampling we mean that the samples are taken following the pattern given by the action of a discrete abelian group on by means of a unitary representation of the group on which also defines the -invariant subspace where the sampling will be carried out. Recall that a unitary representation of on is a homomorphism of into the group of unitary operators in .
In classical shift-invariant subspaces of this group is or a subgroup of it, and the unitary representation is given by the integer shifts. In general, the -invariant subspace in looks like
[TABLE]
where denotes a fixed set of generators in .
For each we consider two sets of samples defined as
[TABLE]
where, in the first case denote elements in , which do not belong necessarily to , and, in the second case, we take and are fixed points in . In the special case where , and \big{[}U(p)f\big{]}(t):=f(t-p), and , the above samples correspond to average or pointwise sampling, respectively, in the corresponding shift-invariant subspace of .
These data samples have in common that can be expressed as a convolution system in the product Hilbert space ( times); namely, for in and we have
[TABLE]
for some sequences (see Section 2 below). Thus, in general, the acquisition of samples can be modeled as a filtering process in . This is very usual situation: the regular samples of any bandlimited function in the Paley-Wiener space are given as , , where denotes the cardinal sine function. In the case of average sampling we have that , , where is the average function.
Under appropriate hypotheses on the Fourier transforms of we obtain (see Thm. 1 in Section 4) necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of stable reconstruction formulas in having the form
[TABLE]
for some sampling functions , , where the corresponding sequence forms a frame for . The use of the Fourier transform in , and the discrete nature of the sampling problem treated here impose that will be a countable discrete abelian group. However, as we will see in Section 4.2, some cases involving non-abelian groups expressed as semi-direct or direct product of groups can be considered inside our study; this is the case of crystallographic groups. Notice that working in locally compact abelian groups is not just a unified way of dealing with the classical groups : signal processing often involves products of these groups which are also locally compact abelian groups. For example, multichannel video signal involves the group , where is the number of channels and the number of pixels of each image.
The used mathematical technique is that of frame theory (see, for instance, Ref. [7]). The existence of the above sampling formula relies on the existence of dual frames for the Hilbert space product having the form , where and denotes the translation operator in . This can be reformulated as follows: given an analysis convolution system associated to data sampling, there exists another synthesis convolution system such that . In other words, working in the Fourier domain , we exploit the relationship between bounded convolution systems and frame theory in the product Hilbert space . All needed results on this relationship are included in Section 3.
Finally, it is worth to mention that most of the well known sampling results can be considered as particular examples of this approach; see Sections 4.2–4.4 for the details. A comparison with some previous similar sampling results is presented in Section 4.5, where some affinities and differences are exhibited.
2 Data samples as a filtering process
Let be a separable Hilbert space, and let be a unitary representation of a countable discrete abelian group on , i.e., it satisfies , for . Given a set of generators in we consider the subspace defined as . Assuming that is a Riesz sequence in , i.e., a Riesz basis for , this subspace can be expressed as
[TABLE]
Let us motivate the sampling approach followed in this work by means of a couple of examples:
Given elements , , which do not belong necessarily to , for any we define for its (generalized) average samples as
[TABLE]
These samples can be expressed as the output of a convolution system. Indeed, for any in , for each one immediately gets
[TABLE]
with , . Notice that each belongs to since the sequence is, in particular, a Bessel sequence in .
Suppose now that and consider fixed points , . For each we define formally its samples, for , as
[TABLE]
It is straightforward to check that, for in , expression 2 holds for a_{m,n}(g)=\big{[}U(-g)\varphi_{n}\big{]}(t_{m}), . Under mild hypotheses (see Section 4.3) one can obtain that is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space of continuous functions in where samples (3) are well defined with corresponding , and yielding pointwise sampling in .
The above two situations englobe most of the regular (average or pointwise) sampling appearing in mathematical or engineering literature as we will see in Section 4.
Consequently, one can think of a sampling process in subspace as expressions like (2), i.e., a convolution system defined in the product Hilbert space ( times) by means of a matrix , i.e., a matrix with entries in , as
[TABLE]
where denotes the (matrix) convolution
[TABLE]
Note that the -th entry of is , where denotes the -th entry of .
The main aim in this paper is to recover, in a stable way, any , or equivalently, the corresponding , from the vector data
[TABLE]
i.e., from the output of the convolution system with associated matrix , in case the vector sampling .
2.1 A brief on harmonic analysis on discrete abelian groups
Let be a countable discrete abelian group and let be the unidimensional torus. We say that is a character of if for all . We denote . By defining , the set of characters is a group, called the dual group of ; since is discrete, the group is compact [9, Prop. 4.4]. In particular, it is known that , with , and , with , where .
There exists a unique measure, the Haar measure on satisfying , for every Borel set , and . We denote .
If ,
[TABLE]
and if ,
[TABLE]
If are abelian discrete groups then the dual group of the product group is \big{(}G_{1}\times G_{2}\times\ldots\times G_{d}\big{)}^{\wedge}\cong\widehat{G}_{1}\times\widehat{G}_{2}\times\ldots\times\widehat{G}_{d} with
[TABLE]
For its Fourier transform is defined as
[TABLE]
The Plancherel theorem extends uniquely the Fourier transform on to a unitary isomorphism from to . For the details see, for instance, Ref. [9].
3 Convolution systems on discrete abelian groups
This section is devoted to collect some known results on discrete convolution systems, and to prove the new ones needed in the sequel. We will consider bounded operators expressed as for each . For a fixed we denote, as usually, the translation by of any as , . The first two results can be found in [18, Thms. 2-3]
Proposition 1**.**
Given A\in\mathcal{M}_{{}_{M\times N}}\big{(}\ell^{2}(G)\big{)}, the operator is a well defined bounded operator from into if and only if \widehat{A}\in\mathcal{M}_{{}_{M\times N}}\big{(}L^{\infty}(\widehat{G})\big{)}, where
[TABLE]
Proposition 2**.**
For a linear operator the following conditions are equivalent:
- (a)
* is a bounded operator that conmutes with translations, i.e., , for all .*
- (b)
There exists a matrix A\in\mathcal{M}_{{}_{M\times N}}\big{(}\ell^{2}(G)\big{)} that satisfies \widehat{A}\in\mathcal{M}_{{}_{M\times N}}\big{(}L^{\infty}(\widehat{G})\big{)} and such that for each .
- (c)
There exists a matrix \Lambda\in\mathcal{M}_{{}_{M\times N}}\big{(}L^{\infty}(\widehat{G})\big{)} such that for each .
The matrices and satisfying (b) and (c) are unique and satisfy .
Under equivalent conditions in Prop. 2, we say that is a bounded convolution operator, and the unique matrix which satisfies for each , is called the transfer matrix of the operator .
Proposition 3**.**
Let be a bounded convolution operator with transfer matrix . Then:
- (a)
The adjoint operator is a bounded convolution operator with transfer matrix , the adjoint matrix (transpose conjugate) of , i.e., , a.e. (in the sequel ). 2. (b)
If is other bounded convolution operator with transfer matrix then the composition is a bounded convolution operator with transfer matrix . 3. (c)
, where denotes the spectral norm of the matrix. 4. (d)
* is injective with a closed range if and only if .* 5. (e)
* is onto if and only if .* 6. (f)
* is an isomorphism if and only if and . In this case, is a bounded convolution operator with transfer matrix and*
[TABLE]
Proof.
- (a)
Using Prop. 2, for each and we have
[TABLE]
Hence for all , and the result follows from Prop. 2. 2. (b)
For each we have that . Since the entries of and belong to , we get that , and the result follows from Prop. 2. 3. (c)
The result is proved in [18, Cor. 6] for the case . Hence, we obtain
[TABLE] 4. (d)
A bounded operator between Hilbert spaces is injective with a closed range if and only if the operator is invertible. By using (a) and (b), we have that is a bounded convolution operator with transfer matrix , and the result follows from [18, Thm. 7]. 5. (e)
A bounded operator is onto if and only if its adjoint operator is injective with a closed range; from (a), the transfer matrix of is . Thus, the result follows from (d). 6. (f)
This characterization is a consequence of (d) and (e). From [18, Thm. 7], the inverse operator is a bounded convolution operator with transfer matrix and norm \|\mathcal{A}^{-1}\|=\big{(}\operatorname*{ess\,inf}_{\xi\in\widehat{G}}\lambda_{\min}[\widehat{A}(\xi)^{*}\widehat{A}(\xi)]\big{)}^{-1/2}
∎
Note that from (a) the matrix associated with the adjoint operator is not the adjoint matrix of , but the one defined by means of the involution
[TABLE]
Indeed, since , we have , a.e. .
3.1 Dual frames in having the form
Given a matrix , the associated convolution operator can be written in terms of its M columns , as
[TABLE]
where denotes the translation operator for each . In other words, operator is the synthesis operator of the sequence \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{b}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} in .
Thus Props. 1, 2 and 3 can be translated (interchanging by ) to the associated sequence \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{b}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M}. For instance, since a sequence in a Hilbert space is a Bessel sequence if and only if its synthesis operator is bounded and, in this case, its optimal Bessel bound is the square of the synthesis operator norm [7], from Props. 1 and 3 we get
Proposition 4**.**
The sequence \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{b}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} is a Bessel sequence for if and only if the transfer matrix belongs to \mathcal{M}_{{}_{N\times M}}\big{(}L^{\infty}(\widehat{G})\big{)}. In this case the optimal Bessel bound is .
Let denote the -th column of the matrix , the associated matrix of , given in (4). The convolution operator can also be written as
[TABLE]
In other words, operator is the analysis operator for the sequence \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} in .
Proposition 5**.**
Assume that . Then:
- (a)
The sequence \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} is a frame for if and only if
[TABLE]
In this case, the optimal frame bounds are
[TABLE]
- (b)
The sequence \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} is a Riesz basis for if and only if and \displaystyle\operatorname*{ess\,inf}_{\xi\in\widehat{G}}\big{|}\det[\widehat{A}(\xi)]\big{|}>0.
Proof.
Since , from Prop. 4 the sequence \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M}, whose corresponding transfer matrix is , is a Bessel sequence of . Since a Bessel sequence is a frame if and only if its analysis operator is injective with a closed range (see, for instance, Ref. [7]), the result is a consequence of Prop. 3(d). Since the optimal upper frame bound is the squared norm of the analysis operator , and the optimal lower frame bound is the reciprocal of the norm of the inverse of the frame operator (see, for instance, Ref. [7]), from Prop. 3 we get
[TABLE]
The Bessel sequence \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} is a Riesz basis for if and only if its synthesis operator is an isomorphism (see, for instance, Ref. [7]). Hence, the result is a consequence of Prop. 3(f). ∎
Proposition 6**.**
Assume that and . Then the sequences \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{n}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,n=1,2,\dots,M} and \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{b}_{n}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,n=1,2,\dots,M} form a pair of dual frames for if and only if
[TABLE]
Proof.
Having in mind that the analysis operator of \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{n}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,n=1,2,\dots,M} is and that the synthesis operator of \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{b}_{n}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,n=1,2,\dots,M} is , we obtain that these two Bessel sequences form a pair of dual frames if and only if [7, Lemma 6.3.2] or, equivalently, , a.e. . (see Prop. 3(b)). ∎
4 The resulting sampling theory
In this section we propose a regular sampling theory for a multiply generated -invariant subspace in a separable Hilbert space . This theory includes most of classical well known regular sampling results for shift-invariant subspaces of . Besides, we obtain new sampling results; for instance, those associated with crystallographic groups.
4.1 Sampling in a -invariant subspace with multiple generators
Suppose that is a unitary representation of the countable discrete abelian group on a separable Hilbert space , and assume that for a fixed set of generators in the sequence \big{\{}U(g)\varphi_{n}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,n=1,2,\dots,N} is a Riesz sequence for . For necessary and sufficient conditions see Ref. [18]; see also Refs. [1, 3, 5, 15, 16]. Thus, we consider the -invariant subspace in
[TABLE]
For a given matrix A=[a_{m,n}]\in\mathcal{M}_{{}_{M\times N}}\big{(}\ell^{2}(G)\big{)}, we consider the vector samples of any defined by
[TABLE]
Assume and \operatorname*{ess\,inf}_{\xi\in\widehat{G}}\det\big{[}\widehat{A}(\xi)^{*}\widehat{A}(\xi)\big{]}>0. Since [\mathcal{A}(\mathbf{x})]_{m}(g)=\big{\langle}\mathbf{x},T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{m}\big{\rangle}_{\ell^{2}_{{}_{N}}(G)}, the optimal frame bounds given in Prop. 5 provide relevant information about the stability of the recovering. Namely,
[TABLE]
where and . Moreover, denoting by and the Riesz bounds for \big{\{}U(g)\varphi_{n}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,n=1,2,\dots,N} (see [18, Thm. 9]) we have
[TABLE]
Now, for the recovery of any from its generalized samples (8), the idea is to find a matrix such that , a.e. . In other words, the corresponding convolution operator should satisfy , that is
[TABLE]
Moreover, an explicit structured sampling formula can be obtained. Namely, the recovering of from the samples can be written as an expansion in terms of a pair of dual frames (see Eqs. (5)–(6) and Prop. 6)
[TABLE]
Besides, we consider the natural isomorphism which maps the standard orthonormal basis for onto the Riesz basis \big{\{}U(g)\varphi_{n}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,n=1,2,\dots,N} for . This isomorphism satisfies the shifting property:
[TABLE]
Finally, for each , applying the isomorphism on (9) and the shifting property (10) we obtain the sampling expansion in
[TABLE]
where the reconstruction elements are given by , , and the sequence is a frame for . In fact, the following sampling theorem in the subspace holds:
Theorem 1**.**
Let A=[a_{m,n}]\in\mathcal{M}_{{}_{M\times N}}\big{(}\ell^{2}(G)\big{)} be the matrix defining the samples , , for each as in (8), and assume that its transfer matrix has all its entries in . Then, the following statements are equivalent:
- (a)
The constant . 2. (b)
There exist constants such that
[TABLE] 3. (c)
There exists a matrix \widehat{B}\in\mathcal{M}_{{}_{N\times M}}\big{(}L^{\infty}(\widehat{G})\big{)} such that , a.e. . 4. (d)
There exists a matrix with , such that
[TABLE]
In other words, there exists a bounded convolution system such that . 5. (e)
There exist elements such that the sequence \big{\{}U(g)S_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} is a frame for and for each the reconstruction formula
[TABLE]
holds. 6. (f)
There exists a frame \big{\{}S_{g,m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} for such that for each the expansion
[TABLE]
holds.
In this case, the reconstruction elements in in formula (12) are necessarily obtained from the columns of a matrix satisfying , i.e., , .
Proof.
First we note that, since , condition is equivalent to condition . Now we prove that and are equivalent. Indeed, since is an isomorphism condition (b) is equivalent to the existence of such that
[TABLE]
Since Eq. (6), this is equivalent to be the sequence \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} a frame for . Therefore, the result follows from Prop. 5.
Assume now that holds. Then, from Prop. 3, operator is invertible, and is a bounded convolution operator satisfying . From Prop. 3, its transfer matrix satisfies the requirement in .
If satisfies , the bounded convolution operator whose transfer matrix is satisfies from Prop. 3, that is, condition .
We have proved that condition implies a sampling expansion as (12), where , , and are the columns of a matrix satisfying . Besides, the sequence \big{\{}U(g)S_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M}=\mathcal{T}_{U,\Phi}\big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{b}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} is a frame since (9) is a frame expansion in and an isomorphism. This proves condition which trivially implies condition .
Finally, condition implies . Applying to the formula in we obtain that \big{\{}T_{g}\mathbf{a}^{*}_{m}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} and form a pair of dual frames for ; in particular, by using Prop. 5(a) we obtain that . ∎
All the possible solutions of a.e. with entries in are given in terms of the Moore-Penrose pseudo-inverse \widehat{A}(\xi)^{\dagger}=\big{[}\widehat{A}(\xi)^{*}\widehat{A}(\xi)\big{]}^{-1}\widehat{A}(\xi)^{*} by means of the matrices \widehat{B}(\xi):=\widehat{A}(\xi)^{\dagger}+C(\xi)\big{[}I_{M}-\widehat{A}(\xi)\widehat{A}(\xi)^{\dagger}\big{]}, where denotes any matrix with entries in . Since , from Prop. 1 we have that
[TABLE]
The best possible bound we can get is , which correspond to choosing or, equivalently, , the pseudo-inverse of (see Ref. [7]).
Notice that in Thm. 1 necessarily where is the number of generators in . In case , we have:
Corollary 2**.**
In case , assume that the transfer matrix has all entries in . The following statements are equivalent:
The constant \displaystyle\operatorname*{ess\,inf}_{\xi\in\widehat{G}}\big{|}\det[\widehat{A}(\xi)]\big{|}>0. 2. 2.
There exist unique elements , , in such that the associated sequence \big{\{}U(g)S_{n}\big{\}}_{g\in G;\,n=1,2,\dots,N} is a Riesz basis for and the sampling formula
[TABLE]
holds for each .
Moreover, the interpolation property , where and , holds.
Proof.
In this case, the square matrix is invertible and the result comes out from Prop. 5(b). The uniqueness of the coefficients in a Riesz basis expansion gives the interpolation property. ∎
4.1.1 A more general framework
A slightly more general setting is motivated by condition in Thm. 1. Namely, let be a Riesz sequence in a separable Hilbert space , and let be its associated subspace, that is,
[TABLE]
Given a matrix A=[a_{m,n}]\in\mathcal{M}_{{}_{M\times N}}\big{(}\ell^{2}(G)\big{)}, for each in we define its data samples by means of and as
[TABLE]
As before, the aim is the stable recovery of any from data . Under the hypotheses on the matrix in Thm.1 there exists a frame for such that for each the reconstruction formula
[TABLE]
holds. Moreover, there exist in , , such that S_{g,m}=\mathcal{T}_{F}\big{(}T_{g}\mathbf{b}_{m}\big{)}, and , where stands for the natural isomorphism which maps the standard orthonormal basis for on the Riesz basis for . Since the subspace has not any a priori structure, the same occurs for the reconstruction functions .
4.2 Some regular sampling settings as particular examples
In this section, we illustrate the result in Thm. 1 with some average sampling examples.
Choose , and \big{(}U(p)f\big{)}(t):=f(t-p), and . Under the hypotheses in Thm. 1 for the average samples given by (1), i.e., for the associated matrix where , we obtain oversampled average sampling in the classical shift-invariant subspace of described as
[TABLE]
Under mild hypotheses, the space is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS). For each a sampling expansion having the form
[TABLE]
holds, for some sampling functions , . Moreover, the sequence is a frame for . As a consequence of the RKHS setting the convergence of the series in the -norm sense implies pointwise convergence which is absolute and uniform on . As we will see later (see Section 4.4), this oversampling can be reduced by sampling on a sublattice of , where denotes a matrix with integer entries and positive determinant.
The case where the group is the semi-direct product of two groups can be easily reduced to the described situation in Section 4.1. Suppose that is a unitary representation of the semi-direct product group (or, in particular, the direct product ) on a separable Hilbert space , where is a countable discrete group and a finite not necessarily abelian group; the subscript denotes the action of the group on the group , i.e., a homomorphism mapping . The composition law in is for . In general, the group is not abelian. In case for each we recover the direct product group .
Assume that for a fixed the sequence \big{\{}U(k,h)\varphi\big{\}}_{(k,h)\in G} is a Riesz sequence for . Thus, the -invariant subspace in spanned by \big{\{}U(k,h)\varphi\big{\}}_{(k,h)\in G} can be described as
[TABLE]
Since , where for . Assuming that the order of the group is , the subspace coincides with the subspace generated by the set , i.e.,
[TABLE]
where and , . For fixed elements , , not necessarily in , we consider for each its generalized samples defined as
[TABLE]
Notice that these samples are a particular case of samples (1). Then, under the hypotheses in Thm.1 on the matrix where a_{m,n}(k)=\big{\langle}\varphi,U[(-k,h_{n})^{-1}]\psi_{m}\big{\rangle}_{\mathcal{H}}, there exist elements such that the sequence \big{\{}U(k,1_{H})S_{m}\big{\}}_{k\in K;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} is a frame for , and for each we have the reconstruction formula
[TABLE]
An important case of the example above is given by crystallographic groups. Namely, the Euclidean motion group is the semi-direct product corresponding to the homomorphism given by , where and ; denotes the orthogonal group of order . The composition law on reads .
Let be a non-singular matrix and a finite subgroup of of order such that for each . We consider the crystallographic group and its quasi regular representation (see Ref. [3]) on
[TABLE]
For a fixed such that the sequence \big{\{}U(p,\gamma)\varphi\big{\}}_{(p,\gamma)\in\mathcal{C}_{P,\Gamma}} is a Riesz sequence for we consider the -invariant subspace in
[TABLE]
Choosing functions , , we consider the average samples of
[TABLE]
Denoting the elements of the group , under the hypotheses of Thm. 1 on the matrix where a_{m,n}(p)=\big{\langle}\varphi(t),\psi_{m}(\gamma_{n}t-p)\big{\rangle}_{L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})}, there exist sampling functions for , such that the sequence is a frame for , and the sampling expansion
[TABLE]
holds. If the generator is continuous in and the function is bounded on , a standard argument shows that is a RKHS of bounded continuous functions in (see, for instance, Ref. [14]). As a consequence, convergence in -norm implies pointwise convergence which is absolute and uniform on .
4.3 The case of pointwise samples whenever
Assume here that is a countable discrete subgroup of a locally compact abelian group and let be a unitary representation of on . Let be the corresponding -invariant subspace of given in (7); for any we consider the samples defined in (3) from fixed points , , i.e.,
[TABLE]
Let be the matrix where a_{m,n}(g)=\big{[}U(-g)\varphi_{n}\big{]}(t_{m}), ; assuming that, for each , the sequence belongs to for each , the matrix has its entries in . Moreover, if the functions , and , are continuous on , and the condition
[TABLE]
holds, then the subspace is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space of continuous bounded functions in . In fact, it is a necessary and sufficient condition as the following result shows; its proof is analogous to that in [14, Lemma 4.2].
Proposition 7**.**
For any the series
[TABLE]
converges pointwise to a continuous bounded function on if and only if for each and , the function is continuous on , and condition (18) holds.
Notice that, whenever and , , , the samples in (17) read
[TABLE]
Choosing , and \big{(}U(p)f\big{)}(t):=f(t-p), and . Thus, under hypotheses in Thm. 1 on the matrix where we obtain oversampled pointwise sampling in the shift-invariant subspace of , i.e., for each a sampling expansion having the form
[TABLE]
holds, for some functions , . The convergence of the series in -norm implies pointwise convergence which is absolute and uniform on .
In the case of the quasi regular representation of the crystallographic group , for each defined in (15) the samples (3) read
[TABLE]
Under hypotheses in Thm. 1 on the matrix where , there exist functions , , such that for each the sampling formula
[TABLE]
holds. The convergence of the series in the -norm sense implies pointwise convergence which is absolute and uniform on .
4.4 Sampling in a subgroup of
Let be a countable discrete LCA group, and let be a subgroup of with finite index . We fix a set of representatives of the cosets of , i.e., the group can be decomposed as
[TABLE]
Given a unitary representation of the group on a separable Hilbert space and a set of generators in , we consider the subspace . In case is a Riesz sequence in , it can be expressed as
[TABLE]
where the sequence
[TABLE]
with . From now on we consider a new index , from to , whose order is the indicated above. Next, for fixed elements , , not necessarily in , for each we define its generalized samples
[TABLE]
For in , the samples (19) can be expressed as
[TABLE]
where a_{m,nl}(h):=\big{\langle}\varphi_{n},U(h-g_{l})\psi_{m}\big{\rangle}_{\mathcal{H}}, , for , and . Notice that each . The subscript means convolution over the subgroup .
If we consider the matrix , the hypotheses in Thm.1 on matrix proves, with slight differences, that and there exists a frame sequence \big{\{}T_{h}\mathbf{b}_{m}\big{\}}_{h\in H;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} for which is a dual frame of \big{\{}T_{h}\mathbf{a}_{m}^{*}\big{\}}_{h\in H;\,m=1,2,\dots,M}. Thus, for any we have
[TABLE]
Next, the natural isomorphism which maps the standard orthonormal basis for on the Riesz basis \big{\{}U(g_{l}+h)\varphi_{n}\big{\}} for , and satisfies the shifting property \mathcal{T}_{U,\Phi}\big{(}T_{h}\mathbf{b}\big{)}=U(h)\big{(}\mathcal{T}_{U,\Phi}\mathbf{b}\big{)} for each and .
Applying the isomorphism in (20) we obtain that any can be recovered from data by means of the sampling formula
[TABLE]
for some sampling functions , . Moreover, the sequence \big{\{}U(h)S_{m}\big{\}}_{h\in H;\,m=1,2,\dots,M} is a frame for .
In particular, consider , and \big{[}U(p)f\big{]}(t):=f(t-p), and . Let be a sublattice in where denotes a matrix of integer entries with positive determinant . Under the hypotheses in Thm. 1 on the matrix where a_{m,nl}(p)=\big{\langle}\varphi_{n}(t),\psi_{m}(t-p+g_{l})\big{\rangle}_{L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})}, the sampling formula (21) gives an average sampling formula in the classical shift-invariant subspace of , i.e., for each formula (21) reads
[TABLE]
for some sampling functions , . Moreover, the sampling sequence is a frame for . The convergence of the series in the -norm sense implies pointwise convergence which is absolute and uniform on .
Whenever , for fixed points , we consider in the shift-invariant subspace the samples \mathcal{L}_{m}f(h):=\big{[}U(-h)f\big{]}(t_{m}), , , for any in the samples can be expressed as
[TABLE]
where a_{m,nl}(h):=\big{[}U(-h+g_{l})\varphi_{n}\big{]}(t_{m}), , for , and .
In particular, if we sample any function in on a sublattice of , under the hypotheses in Thm.1 on the matrix where , there exist sampling functions , , such that we recover any from the samples by means of the sampling formula
[TABLE]
Moreover, the sampling sequence is a frame for . The convergence of the series in the -norm sense implies pointwise convergence which is absolute and uniform on .
4.5 Some final comments
Our main sampling result, Theorem 1, involves some sampling conditions appearing in the mathematical literature; thus, condition says that is a stable averaging sampler for as it was introduced in Ref. [2]. Besides, formula (12) is the expected reconstruction formula in the -invariant subspace . The differences can be found in conditions -- used here since these conditions are directly related to the filtering process defining the samples (8). Consequently, these conditions are given in terms of the convolution system and its transfer matrix . In references concerning shift-invariant subspaces these conditions are given in terms of some Gram matrices (see, for instance, Refs. [1, 2]), or in terms of the so called modulation matrix whose entries are given in terms of the Zak transform as \big{(}Z\mathcal{L}_{m}\varphi_{n}\big{)}(0,w) (see, for instance, Refs. [8, 11, 20]).
As it was mentioned before, some previous sampling results can be seen as particular examples of this approach. As a non-exhaustive sample of such examples we can cite sampling in shift-invariant subspaces Refs. [2, 4, 10, 11, 17, 20, 21], and sampling in -invariant subspaces Refs.[8, 12, 13, 19]. Besides, as it was showed in Section 4.2, the present approach opens new sampling settings: for instance, those related with crystallographic groups involving examples of practical interest.
Acknowledgments: This work has been supported by the grant MTM2017-84098-P from the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (MINECO).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] A. Aldroubi. Oblique proyections in atomic spaces. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 124:2051–2060, 1996.
- 2[2] A. Aldroubi, Q. Sun and W. S. Tang. Convolution, average sampling, and a Calderon resolution of the identity for shift-invariant spaces. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. , 11(2):215–244, 2005.
- 3[3] D. Barbieri, E. Hernández and J. Parcet. Riesz and frame systems generated by unitary actions of discrete groups. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. , 39(3): 369–399, 2015.
- 4[4] A. Bhandari and A. I. Zayed. Shift-invariant and sampling spaces associated with the fractional Fourier transform domain. IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 60(4):1627–1637, 2012.
- 5[5] C. Cabrelli and V. Paternostro. Shift-invariant spaces on LCA groups. J. Funct. Anal. , 258:2034–2059, 2010.
- 6[6] C. de Boor, R. A. De Vore and A. Ron. On the construction of multivariate pre-wavelets. Constr. Approx. , 9:123–166, 1993.
- 7[7] O. Christensen. An Introduction to Frames and Riesz Bases , 2nd ed. Birkhäuser, Boston, 2016.
- 8[8] H. R. Fernández-Morales, A. G. García, M. A. Hernández-Medina and M. J. Muñoz-Bouzo. Generalized sampling: from shift-invariant to U 𝑈 U -invariant spaces. Anal. Appl. , 13(3):303–329, 2015.
