pith. sign in

arxiv: 2306.15758 · v3 · pith:V2BJCGNEnew · submitted 2023-06-27 · 💻 cs.IT · math.IT

On the reconstruction of bandlimited signals from random samples quantized via noise-shaping

Rohan Joy , Felix Krahmer , Alessandro Lupoli , Radha Ramakrishnan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 08:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.IT math.IT
keywords bandlimited functionsnoise-shaping quantizationrandom samplingreconstruction errorSigma-Delta quantizationquantization noiseuniform distribution
0
0 comments X

The pith

Noise-shaping quantization of random samples permits reconstruction of any π-bandlimited function with L2 error decaying in probability as sample count grows.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows that a noise-shaping quantizer applied to randomly sign-flipped samples of a π-bandlimited function f at i.i.d. uniform points on a larger interval yields a reconstruction f♯ whose L2 error on a fixed interval [-R, R] goes to zero with high probability as the number of samples m and the outer interval size increase. The result holds uniformly over all such functions and requires no deterministic structure in the sample locations. This is established for both ΣΔ and distributed noise-shaping schemes. A reader would care because it demonstrates stable quantized reconstruction is possible even when sample positions are chosen completely at random.

Core claim

Suppose R > 1 and the points {x_i} from i=1 to m are i.i.d. uniform on [-R̃, R̃] with R̃ > R chosen appropriately. For any real-valued π-bandlimited f, quantize the randomly sign-flipped values f(x_i) using a noise-shaping quantizer; from the resulting quantized values a function f♯ can be reconstructed so that the L2 norm of f minus f♯ on [-R, R] decays with high probability as m and R̃ increase, and the decay holds uniformly over the entire class of bandlimited functions.

What carries the argument

Noise-shaping quantizer (ΣΔ or distributed) that shapes quantization noise into the null space of the reconstruction operator, applied after random sign flips to i.i.d. uniform samples.

If this is right

  • The L2 reconstruction error on [-R, R] decreases as m grows, with high probability.
  • The decay bound is uniform over all real-valued π-bandlimited functions.
  • The same error decay holds when either ΣΔ quantization or distributed noise-shaping is used.
  • No deterministic arrangement or grid structure on the sample points is required.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Hardware implementations could therefore rely on simpler random sampling mechanisms instead of precise deterministic locations.
  • The same noise-shaping approach might extend to reconstruction operators for other function classes if a suitable null-space property can be verified.
  • Numerical checks could generate large numbers of random points, apply finite-bit noise-shaping, and measure whether observed error rates match the predicted decay.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen noise-shaping quantizer succeeds in directing most of the quantization noise into the null space of the reconstruction operator when the sample locations are random rather than structured.

What would settle it

An explicit sequence of m values tending to infinity together with a fixed bandlimited f and fixed R̃ such that the probability the L2 error on [-R, R] stays above some positive constant does not tend to zero.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2306.15758 by Alessandro Lupoli, Felix Krahmer, Radha Ramakrishnan, Rohan Joy.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Test signal f used in the numerical experiments. -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 -0.3 -0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.31 0.315 0.32 0.325 0.33 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 10-3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Panel (a) and (c): zoomed-in view of f along with f ♯ . Panel (b) and (d): error plots f − f ♯ . The quantization alphabet for MSQ is taken as A10 and A80 (defined in (6.1)) for L = 10 and L = 80 respectively. For β quantization, the greedy quantizer defined in Lemma 2.6 is used to quantize the samples. The noise transfer operator and the quantization alphabet are taken as Hβ = H5, i.e., β = 5 and A0.1 10 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The quantizers and the quantization alphabets are the same as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Noise-shaping quantization techniques are widely used for converting bandlimited signals from the analog to the digital domain. They work by ``shaping" the quantization noise so that it falls close to the reconstruction operator's null space. We investigate the compatibility of two such schemes, specifically $\Sigma\Delta$ quantization and distributed noise-shaping quantization, with random samples of bandlimited functions. Suppose $R>1$ is a real number and assume that $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^m$ is a sequence of i.i.d random variables uniformly distributed on $[-\tilde{R},\tilde{R}]$, where $\tilde{R}>R$ is appropriately chosen. We show that by using a noise-shaping quantizer to quantize the (randomly sign flipped) values of a real-valued $\pi$-bandlimited function $f$ at $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^m$, a function $f^{\sharp}$ can be reconstructed from these quantized values such that $\|f-f^{\sharp}\|_{L^2[-R, R]}$ decays with high probability as $m$ and $\tilde{R}$ increase. This decay holds uniformly over all bandlimited $f$. We emphasize that the sample points $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^m$ are completely random, that is, they have no predefined structure, which makes our findings the first of their kind.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that for π-bandlimited functions f, one can quantize randomly sign-flipped samples at m i.i.d. uniform points on [-R̃, R̃] (R̃ > R chosen appropriately) using ΣΔ or distributed noise-shaping quantization, then reconstruct f♯ from the quantized values such that ||f - f♯||_L2[-R,R] decays with high probability as m and R̃ increase; the decay is uniform over all such f, and the result is presented as the first for completely unstructured random sampling points.

Significance. If the central high-probability uniform bound holds, the result would be significant as the first demonstration that noise-shaping quantization is compatible with fully random sampling for bandlimited reconstruction, without requiring quasi-uniform or structured grids. This has potential implications for practical A/D conversion schemes. The uniformity over the function class and the explicit use of random sign flips to mitigate randomness are notable technical strengths.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, main theorem] Abstract and main theorem (presumably Theorem 1 or equivalent in §3-4): the statement that R̃ is 'appropriately chosen' leaves the dependence of the error constants and the high-probability threshold on R̃/m unspecified. Without explicit bounds showing how the choice of R̃ controls the constants uniformly in f, the claimed decay rate cannot be verified as load-bearing for the uniformity claim.
  2. [Main theorem proof] Proof of the main reconstruction bound (likely §4 or the argument following the noise-shaping recursion): the error analysis relies on the quantization noise lying in the null space of the reconstruction operator with sufficient L2 decay on [-R,R]. Standard ΣΔ recursions bound the integrated error by the maximal local step size, but i.i.d. uniform points on [-R̃,R̃] produce ordered spacings whose maximal gap is Θ((log m)/m) with probability bounded away from zero. If the proof invokes a uniform minimal-density or maximal-gap hypothesis (even after sign flips) to close the recursion, this would prevent the claimed high-probability uniform decay, as a single large gap can inject an O(1) non-annihilated component.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Preliminaries] Notation for the reconstruction operator and the null-space projection should be introduced with an explicit equation number in the preliminaries section for clarity.
  2. [Abstract, Theorem statement] The abstract mentions both ΣΔ and distributed noise-shaping; the main theorem statement should clarify whether the constants and probability bounds are identical for both schemes or differ by a fixed factor.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful review and insightful comments on our work. We address each major comment below and will incorporate clarifications and explicit bounds in a revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract, main theorem] Abstract and main theorem (presumably Theorem 1 or equivalent in §3-4): the statement that R̃ is 'appropriately chosen' leaves the dependence of the error constants and the high-probability threshold on R̃/m unspecified. Without explicit bounds showing how the choice of R̃ controls the constants uniformly in f, the claimed decay rate cannot be verified as load-bearing for the uniformity claim.

    Authors: We agree that the dependence on the choice of R̃ should be made fully explicit to allow verification of the uniformity claim. In the revision we will state the main theorem with explicit constants (including the high-probability threshold) expressed in terms of the ratio R̃/m and the bandlimit, showing that a suitable growth of R̃ with m yields the claimed decay uniformly over the function class. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Main theorem proof] Proof of the main reconstruction bound (likely §4 or the argument following the noise-shaping recursion): the error analysis relies on the quantization noise lying in the null space of the reconstruction operator with sufficient L2 decay on [-R,R]. Standard ΣΔ recursions bound the integrated error by the maximal local step size, but i.i.d. uniform points on [-R̃,R̃] produce ordered spacings whose maximal gap is Θ((log m)/m) with probability bounded away from zero. If the proof invokes a uniform minimal-density or maximal-gap hypothesis (even after sign flips) to close the recursion, this would prevent the claimed high-probability uniform decay, as a single large gap can inject an O(1) non-annihilated component.

    Authors: The proof does not invoke a deterministic uniform minimal-density or maximal-gap hypothesis. The random sign flips randomize the effective quantization noise, and the reconstruction operator (a suitable bandlimited interpolant) annihilates the shaped noise in L2[-R,R] with high probability; the contribution of any single large gap is controlled via the exponential decay of the sinc kernel outside [-R,R] together with the integrated error bound from the ΣΔ recursion. We will add an auxiliary lemma making this probabilistic control explicit and showing that the probability of an O(1) non-annihilated component vanishes as m and R̃ grow. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation rests on external probabilistic bounds and standard bandlimited properties

full rationale

The abstract and reader's summary indicate the central result is a high-probability uniform error bound derived from noise-shaping quantization applied to i.i.d. uniform random samples (with sign flips) of π-bandlimited functions. This relies on external probabilistic arguments for random point distributions and standard reconstruction operator null-space properties, without any quoted reduction of the claimed decay to fitted parameters, self-definitional loops, or load-bearing self-citations. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks rather than tautological.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that f is exactly π-bandlimited, that the quantizer can be chosen to map noise into the reconstruction null space, and that R̃ can be selected larger than R without further specification of how large; these are domain assumptions standard in the field but not derived inside the paper.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption f is a real-valued π-bandlimited function
    Invoked in the abstract when defining the input class for which uniform reconstruction holds.
  • domain assumption The noise-shaping quantizer shapes quantization noise into the null space of the reconstruction operator
    Stated as the operating principle of the schemes considered (abstract, sentence 2).

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5782 in / 1450 out tokens · 37226 ms · 2026-05-24T08:02:51.231474+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Aldroubi and K

    A. Aldroubi and K. Gr¨ ochenig, Nonuniform sampling and reconstruction in shift-invarian t spaces, SIAM Rev. 43 (2001), no. 4, 585–620. MR 1882684

    work page 2001

  2. [2]

    Arati, P

    S. Arati, P. Devaraj, and A. K. Garg, Random average sampling and reconstruction in shift-invar iant sub- spaces of mixed Lebesgue spaces , Results Math. 77 (2022), no. 6, Paper No. 223, 38. MR 4491129

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    R. F. Bass and K. Gr¨ ochenig, Random sampling of multivariate trigonometric polynomial s, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 36 (2004/05), no. 3, 773–795. MR 2111915 4. , Random sampling of bandlimited functions , Israel J. Math. 177 (2010), 1–28. MR 2684411

    work page 2004

  4. [4]

    , Relevant sampling of band-limited functions , Illinois J. Math. 57 (2013), no. 1, 43–58. MR 3224560

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    J. J. Benedetto, A. M. Powell, and ¨O. Yilmaz, Second-order sigma-delta (Σ∆) quantization of finite frame expansions, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 20 (2006), no. 1, 126–148. MR 2200933

    work page 2006

  6. [6]

    , Sigma-delta (Σ∆) quantization and finite frames , IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 52 (2006), no. 5, 1990–2005. MR 2234460

    work page 2006

  7. [7]

    J. Blum, M. Lammers, A. M. Powell, and ¨O. Yilmaz, Sobolev duals in frame theory and sigma-delta quanti- zation, J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 16 (2010), no. 3, 365–381. MR 2643587

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    B. G. Bodmann and V. I. Paulsen, Frame paths and error bounds for sigma-delta quantization , Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 22 (2007), no. 2, 176–197. MR 2295294

    work page 2007

  9. [9]

    B. G. Bodmann, V. I. Paulsen, and S. A. Abdulbaki, Smooth frame-path termination for higher order sigma- delta quantization , J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 13 (2007), no. 3, 285–307. MR 2334611

    work page 2007

  10. [10]

    E. J. Cand` es, J.K. Romberg, and T. Tao, Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal reconstructi on from highly incomplete frequency information , IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 52 (2006), no. 2, 489–509. MR 2236170

    work page 2006

  11. [11]

    Pure Appl

    , Stable signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate meas urements, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 59 (2006), no. 8, 1207–1223. MR 2230846 29

    work page 2006

  12. [12]

    Chou and C

    E. Chou and C. S. G¨ unt¨ urk,Distributed noise-shaping quantization: I. Beta duals of fi nite frames and near- optimal quantization of random measurements , Constr. Approx. 44 (2016), no. 1, 1–22. MR 3514402

    work page 2016

  13. [13]

    Classical fr ames, Excursions in harmonic analysis

    , Distributed noise-shaping quantization: II. Classical fr ames, Excursions in harmonic analysis. Vol. 5, Appl. Numer. Harmon. Anal., Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Cham , 2017, pp. 179–198. MR 3699683

    work page 2017

  14. [14]

    E. Chou, C. S. G¨ unt¨ urk, F. Krahmer, R. Saab, and ¨O. Yilmaz, Noise-shaping quantization methods for frame-based and compressive sampling systems, Sampling theory, a renaissance, Appl. Numer. Harmon. Anal ., Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Cham, 2015, pp. 157–184. MR 3467421

    work page 2015

  15. [15]

    Christensen, An introduction to frames and Riesz bases , second ed., Applied and Numerical Harmonic Analysis, Birkh¨ auser/Springer, [Cham], 2016

    O. Christensen, An introduction to frames and Riesz bases , second ed., Applied and Numerical Harmonic Analysis, Birkh¨ auser/Springer, [Cham], 2016. MR 3495345

    work page 2016

  16. [16]

    Cvetkovi´ c, I

    Z. Cvetkovi´ c, I. Daubechies, and B. F. Logan, Jr., Single-bit oversampled A/D conversion with exponential accuracy in the bit rate , IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 53 (2007), no. 11, 3979–3989. MR 2446550

    work page 2007

  17. [17]

    Daubechies and R

    I. Daubechies and R. DeVore, Approximating a bandlimited function using very coarsely q uantized data: a family of stable sigma-delta modulators of arbitrary order , Ann. of Math. (2) 158 (2003), no. 2, 679–710. MR 2018933

    work page 2003

  18. [18]

    Deift and F

    P. Deift and F. G¨ unt¨ urk, C. S.and Krahmer,An optimal family of exponentially accurate one-bit sigma- delta quantization schemes , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 64 (2011), no. 7, 883–919. MR 2828585

    work page 2011

  19. [19]

    J. Feng, F. Krahmer, and R. Saab, Quantized compressed sensing for random circulant matrice s, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 47 (2019), no. 3, 1014–1032. MR 3995001

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Z. Gao, F. Krahmer, and A. M. Powell, High-order low-bit sigma-delta quantization for fusion fr ames, Anal. Appl. (Singap.) 19 (2021), no. 1, 1–20. MR 4178410

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    V. K. Goyal, M. Vetterli, and N. T. Thao, Quantized overcomplete expansions in RN : analysis, synthesis, and algorithms , IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 44 (1998), no. 1, 16–31. MR 1486646

    work page 1998

  22. [22]

    Gray, Oversampled sigma-delta modulation , IEEE Transactions on Communications 35 (1987), no

    R. Gray, Oversampled sigma-delta modulation , IEEE Transactions on Communications 35 (1987), no. 5, 481–489

    work page 1987

  23. [23]

    Gr¨ ochenig, Localization of frames, Banach frames, and the invertibili ty of the frame operator , J

    K. Gr¨ ochenig, Localization of frames, Banach frames, and the invertibili ty of the frame operator , J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 10 (2004), no. 2, 105–132. MR 2054304

    work page 2004

  24. [24]

    C. S. G¨ unt¨ urk,One-bit sigma-delta quantization with exponential accura cy, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 56 (2003), no. 11, 1608–1630. MR 1995871

    work page 2003

  25. [25]

    C. S. G¨ unt¨ urk, M. Lammers, A. M. Powell, R. Saab, and ¨O. Yilmaz, Sobolev duals for random frames and Σ∆ quantization of compressed sensing measurements , Found. Comput. Math. 13 (2013), no. 1, 1–36. MR 3009528

    work page 2013

  26. [26]

    C. S. G¨ unt¨ urk and W. Li, Quantization for spectral super-resolution , Constr. Approx. 56 (2022), no. 3, 619–648. MR 4519592

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    Huynh and R

    T. Huynh and R. Saab, Fast binary embeddings and quantized compressed sensing wi th structured matrices , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 73 (2020), no. 1, 110–149. MR 4033891

    work page 2020

  28. [28]

    Inose and Y

    H. Inose and Y. Yasuda, A unity bit coding method by negative feedback , Proceedings of the IEEE 51 (1963), no. 11, 1524–1535

    work page 1963

  29. [29]

    Jiang and W

    Y. Jiang and W. Li, Random sampling in multiply generated shift-invariant sub spaces of mixed Lebesgue spaces Lp,q (R × Rd), J. Comput. Appl. Math. 386 (2021), Paper No. 113237, 15. MR 4163095

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    Jiang and H

    Y. Jiang and H. Zhang, Random sampling in multi-window quasi shift-invariant spa ces, Results Math. 78 (2023), no. 3, Paper No. 83, 20. MR 4552683

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Krahmer, R

    F. Krahmer, R. Saab, and R. Ward, Root-exponential accuracy for coarse quantization of finit e frame expan- sions, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 58 (2012), no. 2, 1069–1079. MR 2918010

    work page 2012

  32. [32]

    Krahmer, R

    F. Krahmer, R. Saab, and ¨O. Yilmaz, Sigma-Delta quantization of sub-Gaussian frame expansion s and its application to compressed sensing , Inf. Inference 3 (2014), no. 1, 40–58. MR 3311448

    work page 2014

  33. [33]

    Krahmer and R

    F. Krahmer and R. Ward, Lower bounds for the error decay incurred by coarse quantiza tion schemes , Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 32 (2012), no. 1, 131–138. MR 2854165

    work page 2012

  34. [34]

    Lammers, A

    M. Lammers, A. M. Powell, and ¨O. Yilmaz, Alternative dual frames for digital-to-analog conversion in sigma- delta quantization , Adv. Comput. Math. 32 (2010), no. 1, 73–102. MR 2574568

    work page 2010

  35. [35]

    Y. Li, Q. Sun, and J. Xian, Random sampling and reconstruction of concentrated signal s in a reproducing kernel space, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 54 (2021), 273–302. MR 4241985

    work page 2021

  36. [36]

    Y. Li, J. Wen, and J. Xian, Reconstruction from convolution random sampling in local s hift invariant spaces , Inverse Problems 35 (2019), no. 12, 125008, 15. MR 4041950

    work page 2019

  37. [37]

    Lu and J

    Y. Lu and J. Xian, Non-uniform random sampling and reconstruction in signal s paces with finite rate of innovation, Acta Appl. Math. 169 (2020), 247–277. MR 4146900

    work page 2020

  38. [38]

    Moeller and T

    M. Moeller and T. Ullrich, L2-norm sampling discretization and recovery of functions fr om RKHS with finite trace, Sampl. Theory Signal Process. Data Anal. 19 (2021), no. 2, Paper No. 13, 31. MR 4354442

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Patel and S

    D. Patel and S. Sampath, Random sampling in reproducing kernel subspaces of Lp(Rn), J. Math. Anal. Appl. 491 (2020), no. 1, 124270, 18. MR 4110265

    work page 2020

  40. [40]

    Plan and R

    Y. Plan and R. Vershynin, One-bit compressed sensing by linear programming , Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 66 (2013), no. 8, 1275–1297. MR 3069959

    work page 2013

  41. [41]

    A. M. Powell, J. Tanner, Y. Wang, and ¨O. Yilmaz, Coarse quantization for random interleaved sampling of bandlimited signals , ESAIM Math. Model. Numer. Anal. 46 (2012), no. 3, 605–618. MR 2877367 30

    work page 2012

  42. [42]

    A. M. Powell and J. T. Whitehouse, Error bounds for consistent reconstruction: random polyto pes and coverage processes, Found. Comput. Math. 16 (2016), no. 2, 395–423. MR 3464211

    work page 2016

  43. [43]

    R. Saab, R. Wang, and ¨O. Yilmaz, From compressed sensing to compressed bit-streams: practi cal encoders, tractable decoders, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 64 (2018), no. 9, 6098–6114. MR 3849541

    work page 2018

  44. [44]

    , Quantization of compressive samples with stable and robust recovery, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 44 (2018), no. 1, 123–143. MR 3707866

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    Wang, Sigma delta quantization with harmonic frames and partial F ourier ensembles , J

    R. Wang, Sigma delta quantization with harmonic frames and partial F ourier ensembles , J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 24 (2018), no. 6, 1460–1490. MR 3881838

    work page 2018

  46. [46]

    Yang, Random sampling and reconstruction in multiply generated s hift-invariant spaces, Anal

    J. Yang, Random sampling and reconstruction in multiply generated s hift-invariant spaces, Anal. Appl. (Sin- gap.) 17 (2019), no. 2, 323–347. MR 3921925

    work page 2019

  47. [47]

    Yang and W

    J. Yang and W. Wei, Random sampling in shift invariant spaces , J. Math. Anal. Appl. 398 (2013), no. 1, 26–34. MR 2984312 Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, India Email address : rohanjoy96@gmail.com Center of Mathematics, Technical University of Munich, Ger many Email address : felix.krahmer@tum.de Center of Mathematics, Te...

    work page 2013