Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 83 references

Normalized Iterative Hard Thresholding for Tensor Recovery

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper proposes TNIHT, a tensor analogue of normalized iterative hard thresholding, and claims a convergence guarantee under the tensor restricted isometry property for low CP-rank and Tucker-rank recovery; the algorithm actually…

desk verdict Abstract promises a convergence theorem for TNIHT that the paper never states or proves; the body runs TSVRG and the experiments are unfinished. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.04228 v1 pith:KLZSVHIV submitted 2025-07-06 cs.LG eess.SP

Li Li , Yuneng Liang , Kaijie Zheng , Jian Lu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LGeess.SP MSC 15A6965K0590C26
keywords tensorrecoveryiterativehardthresholdingnormalizedstochasticvariancereducedgradientCPrankTuckerrestrictedisometrypropertylow-rank
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper sets out to show that iterative hard thresholding can be lifted from sparse vectors and low-rank matrices to tensors, by adding a normalization step and projecting onto the set of tensors of CP rank or Tucker rank at most r. The concrete algorithm presented and tested under the TNIHT umbrella is a stochastic variance-reduced gradient method, TSVRG, which alternates a corrected sampled-gradient update with a hard-thresholding projection. The abstract announces a convergence theorem under the tensor restricted isometry property, but the text contains no theorem statement or proof, only the remark that the proof has been completed. The supporting evidence is numerical: on synthetic tensors and on video data, TSVRG is reported to converge faster and reach lower relative error than the TIHT and StoTIHT baselines for both rank models. If the missing convergence proof can be supplied, the method would give tensor recovery the same style of formal guarantee that NIHT provides for sparse vector recovery.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the projected stochastic gradient loop $$X_{t+1}=H_r\big(\tilde X_t\big), \qquad \tilde X_t=X_t-\eta\big(\nabla f_{l_t}(X_t)-\nabla f_{l_t}(\tilde X_k)+g_k\big),$$ where $H_r$ is a hard-thresholding operator returning a best rank-$r$ tensor approximation under CP or Tucker rank and $g_k$ is the full gradient at the outer iterate. The variance-reduced correction is what distinguishes the method from plain tensor IHT, and it is the component responsible for the reported faster convergence. The paper's claimed convergence argument would rest on the tensor restricted isometry property (TRIP) and on the near-best approximation inequality $\|H_r(\tilde X_t)-\tilde X_t\|_F\le \theta\|\tilde X_t^{best}-\tilde X_t\|_F$, which ties the implementable projector to the ideal best rank-$r$ approximation; for Tucker rank such a projector is standard via truncated mode-wise SVD, whereas for CP rank its existence is not guaranteed.

What would settle it

Run TSVRG on a small random Gaussian-measurement tensor recovery problem with a known low CP rank and vary the sampling ratio; the claimed TRIP-based guarantee predicts exact recovery above a specific measurement count, so recovery failures at or above that count would falsify it. A simpler check is textual: the manuscript announces a convergence theorem but contains no theorem statement or proof, so the claimed guarantee is currently unsupported.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that replacing the gradient step of tensor iterative hard thresholding with a variance-reduced stochastic gradient step preserves the recovery behavior of hard thresholding while making each iteration cheaper and accelerating convergence. The method computes a corrected update from a randomly sampled block of measurements plus a stored full gradient, then applies a hard-thresholding operator H_r that projects onto tensors of CP rank or Tucker rank at most r. The paper claims that this projected stochastic iteration converges under the tensor restricted isometry property, and reports experiments in which TSVRG beats TIHT and StoTIHT in convergence rate and final relative error on synthetic and real video tensors. The text says the convergence proof is complete but does not display the theorem or its proof, so the claimed guarantee itself remains an assertion rather than an established result.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that an implementable hard-thresholding operator $H_r$ exists for the chosen rank model and is nearly as good as the ideal best rank-$r$ approximation, as required by inequality (3.12); for CP rank this premise can fail, because the set of tensors of CP rank at most $r$ is not closed and computing best approximations is NP-hard in general.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Recovery of low-CP-rank and low-Tucker-rank tensors from linear measurements becomes achievable with per-iteration cost of one sampled gradient plus a stored full gradient, rather than a fresh full gradient at every step.
  • If the announced TRIP-based convergence theorem is valid, the method inherits the style of guarantee NIHT has for sparse vectors, with successful recovery tied to the measurement operator satisfying a tensor restricted isometry condition.
  • The numerical results imply that variance reduction helps iterative hard thresholding escape local minima and reach a given relative error in fewer iterations than TIHT and StoTIHT.
  • Because the same projected-update template works for both CP and Tucker rank, the algorithmic idea can be applied to whichever low-rank tensor model best fits the data.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the title and abstract promise TNIHT, but the displayed algorithm is named TSVRG, so any formal guarantee attributed to 'TNIHT' should be checked against the actual update rule before being relied on.
  • Editorial inference: the thresholding step is on solid ground for Tucker rank, where truncated mode-wise SVD provides a usable $H_r$, but for CP rank the near-best approximation assumption may fail because the CP-rank set is not closed; the reported CP-rank success may depend on the specific thresholding heuristic rather than on a guaranteed projector.
  • Editorial inference: a natural testable extension is to derive explicit sample-complexity bounds from the TRIP constant and compare them with empirical phase transitions, which would show whether the observed gains persist at larger scale.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims to propose TNIHT, a tensor extension of normalized iterative hard thresholding, for recovering low CP-rank and Tucker-rank tensors from linear measurements, and claims a convergence theorem under the tensor restricted isometry property (TRIP). In the body, however, the only algorithm actually defined is "Tensor Stochastic Variance Reduced Gradient" (TSVRG, Algorithm 1), whose update is an SVRG step followed by a hard-thresholding projection (Eq. 3.11). No theorem, lemma, corollary, or proof appears anywhere, and TRIP is never formally defined. Section 4 describes numerical comparisons on synthetic and video data against TIHT and StoTIHT, but the Image subsections are empty and no figures, tables, or numerical result files are included in the manuscript text.

Significance. Low-rank tensor recovery under CP and Tucker ranks is a meaningful problem, and a correct convergence theory for a normalized tensor iterative hard thresholding method would be of interest to the compressed sensing and tensor recovery community. The manuscript does not deliver such a theory: the central abstract claim is absent from the body, and the algorithm whose convergence is asserted, TSVRG, is not the algorithm advertised in the title and abstract, TNIHT. The empirical section is also incomplete. I therefore cannot credit the paper with a new theoretical guarantee or with verifiable numerical evidence at this stage. The literature survey does provide useful context by connecting TIHT, StoIHT, and SVRG for tensor recovery, but that alone is not sufficient for publication.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; Section 3; Algorithm 1] The abstract's central claim that the paper "establish[es] a convergence theorem for the proposed TNIHT method under the tensor restricted isometry property (TRIP)" is not supported anywhere in the manuscript. Section 3, Eq. (3.11), and Algorithm 1 present a tensor SVRG method (TSVRG), not a normalized iterative hard thresholding method; the name "TNIHT" never appears in a formal statement, no theorem or proof is stated, and TRIP is not defined. The sentence in Section 3 that "we have completed the convergence proof of the Tensor SVRG algorithm" is an assertion without a derivation, and the Introduction's promise of a "linearly convergent guarantee" in Section 4 is not fulfilled because Section 4 contains only numerical experiments.
  2. [Section 3, Eq. (3.12)] Assumption (3.12) requires a hard-thresholding operator H_r that maps every tensor to a near-best rank-r approximation with distortion theta, and the text assumes that a best rank-r approximation exists. For CP rank, the set of tensors of CP rank at most r is not closed and best approximations can fail to exist; moreover, finding such approximations is NP-hard in general (Hillar and Lim [31]). The manuscript does not specify an implementable H_r for the CP-rank case that satisfies (3.12), so the projected iterates X_{t+1} = H_r(Xtilde_t) in Algorithm 1 may not even be well-defined. This issue would need to be resolved for any convergence proof that relies on (3.12).
  3. [Section 4] Section 4 does not provide verifiable empirical evidence in the submitted text. Subsections 4.1.2 and 4.2.2 ("Image") are empty, and although the narrative refers to Figures 1–4, no figure captions, figures, tables, or numerical result files are present in the manuscript text. The statement that each run was repeated five times and averaged does not compensate for the absence of error bars or standard deviations. The empirical claim that TSVRG outperforms TIHT and StoTIHT is therefore not supported by the submitted material.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 3] The construction of F(X) above Eq. (3.8) is not written cleanly: it switches between m, M, and l without explaining their relationship consistently, and the definition of f_i is unclear. Please reformulate this part with consistent notation.
  2. [Sections 2 and 4] Please correct typos and heading errors: "Virtual" should be "Synthetic" in Sections 4.1.1 and 4.2.1; "PSVR" should be "PSNR" in Section 4.1.3; "r = (8 .8.2)" should be "r = (8,8,2)" in Section 4.2.3; and "the out product" in Section 2.2 should be "outer product."
  3. [References] Several references are cited in the text but do not appear in the reference list, and some entries contain incomplete bibliographic information (for example, [20] ends with "pp." and [51] gives only an arXiv identifier without a title). Please check all citations carefully before resubmission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation identified: the promised TNIHT convergence theorem is never stated or proved, and the implemented algorithm is TSVRG, so the central claim is unsupported rather than circular.

full rationale

The manuscript contains no derivation chain that is circular. The abstract promises a convergence theorem for TNIHT under the tensor restricted isometry property, but the body never states a theorem, lemma, or proof, never defines the TNIHT normalization step, and never formally defines TRIP. Equation (3.11) and Algorithm 1 describe TSVRG, i.e. SVRG followed by hard thresholding, and the text says 'Now, we have completed the convergence proof of the Tensor SVRG algorithm' while Section 4 contains only numerical experiments. Assumption (3.12), concerning a near-best rank-r approximation, is an unverified technical assumption and is especially problematic for CP rank, but it is an input to the proposed analysis rather than a conclusion derived from it; it is not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, nor a definition that forces the target result by construction. The reported experiments compare standard RSE and PSNR values and are not presented as predictions from fitted parameters. The self-citations in the reference list, including [30], are not invoked as the load-bearing justification for the missing theorem. Thus the central claim is unsupported or absent, which is a serious correctness risk, but no identifiable circular step exists, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim, if it were proved, would rest on the near-best rank-r approximation inequality (3.12), the existence of best rank-r approximations, and a TRIP condition on the sensing operator. The paper neither proves these assumptions nor provides an explicit Hr for CP rank. No new entities or fitted parameters are introduced, but the missing theory leaves the claim unsupported.

assumptions (3)
  • ad hoc to paper Near-best rank-r approximation bound (3.12): ||Hr(X~t) - X~t||_F <= theta ||X~t_best - X~t||_F for all iterations.
    Invoked in Section 3 as a standing assumption. It is not guaranteed for CP rank and no implementable hard thresholding operator satisfying it is specified.
  • domain assumption A best rank-r approximation X~t_best exists for every iterate.
    Stated in Section 3: 'we will also presume that such an approximation X~t_best is existent.' This can fail for CP rank because the set of CP rank at most r tensors is not closed.
  • domain assumption The measurement operator A satisfies the tensor restricted isometry property (TRIP) over rank-r tensors.
    The abstract and surrounding text claim the convergence theorem holds under TRIP, but TRIP is not defined in the body and no verification or citation is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Normalized Iterative Hard Thresholding for Tensor Recovery." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KLZSVHIV

@misc{pith2026250704228,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Normalized Iterative Hard Thresholding for Tensor Recovery},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KLZSVHIV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.04228}
}
read the original abstract

Low-rank recovery builds upon ideas from the theory of compressive sensing, which predicts that sparse signals can be accurately reconstructed from incomplete measurements. Iterative thresholding-type algorithms-particularly the normalized iterative hard thresholding (NIHT) method-have been widely used in compressed sensing (CS) and applied to matrix recovery tasks. In this paper, we propose a tensor extension of NIHT, referred to as TNIHT, for the recovery of low-rank tensors under two widely used tensor decomposition models. This extension enables the effective reconstruction of high-order low-rank tensors from a limited number of linear measurements by leveraging the inherent low-dimensional structure of multi-way data. Specifically, we consider both the CANDECOMP/PARAFAC (CP) rank and the Tucker rank to characterize tensor low-rankness within the TNIHT framework. At the same time, we establish a convergence theorem for the proposed TNIHT method under the tensor restricted isometry property (TRIP), providing theoretical support for its recovery guarantees. Finally, we evaluate the performance of TNIHT through numerical experiments on synthetic, image, and video data, and compare it with several state-of-the-art algorithms.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages

  1. [31]

    Hillar and L

    C. Hillar and L. Lim, (2013). Most tensor problems are NP-hard. Journal of the ACM, 60 (6), pp. 1-39. 10

    work page 2013

  2. [1]

    Athisayamani and D

    S. Athisayamani and D. Dejey, (2019). A novel video coding framework with tensor representation for efficient video streaming. Wireless Personal Communications, 109 (4), pp. 2699-2717

    2019

  3. [2]

    1529–1543

    Bubacarr Bah, Luca Baldassarre, Volkan Cevher, Model-based sketching and recovery with expanders, in: Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SIAM, 2014, pp. 1529–1543

    2014

  4. [3]

    Bubacarr Bah, Jannis Kurtz, Oliver Schaudt, Discrete optimization methods for group model selection in compressed sensing, Math. Program. 190 (1) (2021) 171–220

    2021

  5. [4]

    Barzilai and J

    J. Barzilai and J. Borwein, (1988). Two-point step size gradient methods. IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis, 8 (1), pp. 141-148

    work page 1988

  6. [5]

    J. D. Blanchard, M. Cermak, D. Hanle and Y. Jing, (2014). Greedy algorithms for joint sparse recovery. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 62 (7), pp. 1694-1704

    work page 2014

  7. [6]

    J. D. Blanchard, J. Tanner and K. Wei, (2015). CGIHT: conjugate gradient iterative hard thresholding for compressed sensing and matrix completion. Information and Inference: A Journal of the IMA, 4 (4), pp. 289-327

    work page 2015

  8. [7]

    Blumensath and M

    T. Blumensath and M. Davies, (2008). Iterative thresholding for sparse approximations. Journal of Fourier Analysis and Application, 14 (5), pp. 629-654

    work page 2008

Show all 83 references
  1. [8]

    Blumensath, T. , and M. E. Davies . ”Normalized Iterative Hard Thresholding: Guaranteed Stability and Performance.” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing 4.2(2010):298-309

    2010

  2. [9]

    Blumensath, Thomas, and Mike E. Davies. Iterative hard thresholding for compressed sensing. Applied and computational harmonic analysis 27.3 (2009): 265-274

    2009

  3. [10]

    Caiafa, J, Sol´ e-Casals, P

    C. Caiafa, J, Sol´ e-Casals, P. Marti-Puig, S. Zhe and T. Tanaka, (2020). Decomposition meth- ods for machine learning with small, incomplete or noisy datasets. Applied Sciences, 10 (23), DOI: 10.3390/app10238481

    2020 doi

  4. [11]

    C. Cao, H. Yue, X. Liu and J. Yang, (2023). Unsupervised HDR image and video tone mapping via contrastive learning. arXiv: 2303.07327v2

    2023 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Carpentier and A

    A. Carpentier and A. Kim, (2016). An iterative hard thresholding estimator for low rank matrix recovery with explicit limiting distribution. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.04654v3 [math.ST]. 9

    2016 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Chang, L

    Y. Chang, L. Yan, X. Zhao, H. Fang, Z. Zhang and S. Zhong, (2020). Weighted low-rank tensor recovery for hyperspectral image restoration. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 50 (11), pp. 4558–4572

    2020

  7. [14]

    Chen and M

    J. Chen and M. Yuan, (2025). Optimal Quantized Compressed Sensing via Projected Gradient Descent. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.04951v2

    2025 arXiv

  8. [15]

    S. Duan, X. Duan, C. Li and J. Li, (2023). Riemannian conjugate gradient method for low-rank tensor completion. Advances in Computational Mathematics, 49 (3), doi: 10.1007/s10444-023-10036-0

    2023 doi

  9. [16]

    Driggs, M

    D. Driggs, M. Ehrhardt and C. Sch¨ onlieb, (2022). Accelerating variance-reduced stochastic gradient methods. Mathematical Programming, 191, pp. 671–715

    2022

  10. [17]

    Friedland and L

    S. Friedland and L. Lim, (2018). Nuclear norm of higher-order tensors. Mathematics of Computation, 87 (311), pp. 1255–1281

    2018

  11. [18]

    Fornasier, H

    M. Fornasier, H. Rauhut and R. Ward, (2011). Low-rank matrix recovery via iteratively reweighted least squares minimization. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 21, pp. 1614–1640

    2011

  12. [19]

    Foucart, (2011)

    S. Foucart, (2011). Hard Thresholding Pursuit: An algorithms for compressive sensing. SIAM J. NU- MER. ANAL. Vol. 49, No. 6, pp. 2543–256

    2011

  13. [20]

    Foucart, (2011)

    S. Foucart, (2011). Recovering jointly sparse vectors via hard thresholding pursuit. In 2011 18th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), pp

    2011

  14. [21]

    Foucart, H

    S. Foucart, H. Rauhut, A mathematical introduction to compressive sensing, first ed., Applied and Numerical Harmonic Analysis, 10.1007/978-0-8176-4948-7, Birkhauser New York, NY, 2013, p. XVIII, 625, Copyright: Springer Science and Business Media New York

    2013 doi

  15. [22]

    Foucart and S

    S. Foucart and S. Subramanian, (2019). Iterative hard thresholding for low-rank recovery from rank-one projections. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 572, pp. 117-134

    2019

  16. [23]

    Goulart and G

    J. Goulart and G. Favier, (2015). An iterative hard thresholding algorithm with improved convergence for low-rank tensor recovery. In 2015 23rd European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO), pp. 1666- 1670

    2015

  17. [24]

    Grotheer, S

    R. Grotheer, S. Li, A. Ma, D. Needell and J. Qin, (2020). Stochastic iterative hard thresholding for low-tucker-rank tensor recovery. 2020 Information Theory and Applications Workshop (ITA)

    2020

  18. [25]

    Grotheer, S

    R. Grotheer, S. Li, A. Ma, D. Needell and J. Qin, (2021). Iterative hard thresholding for low CP-rank tensor models. Linear and Multilinear Algebra, 70 (22), pp. 7452–7468

    2021

  19. [26]

    Grotheer, S

    R. Grotheer, S. Li, A. Ma, D. Needell and J. Qin, (2023). Iterative singular tube hard thresholding algorithms for tensor completion. arXiv: 2304.04860v1

    2023 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Grotheer, S

    R. Grotheer, S. Li, A. Ma, D. Needell and J. Qin, (2024). Iterative singular tube hard thresholding algorithms for tensor recovery. Inverse Problems and Imaging, 18 (4), pp. 889-907

    2024

  21. [28]

    J. Guo, Y. Sun, J. Gao, Y. Hu and B. Yin, (2023). Logarithmic schatten-p norm minimization for tenso- rial multi-View subspace clustering. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysisb and Machine Intelligence, 45(3), pp. 3396–3410

    2023

  22. [29]

    P. Han, R. Niu and Y. C. Eldar, (2015). MODIFIED DISTRIBUTED ITERATIVE HARD THRESH- OLDING. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 3766-3770

    2015

  23. [30]

    N. Han, J. Nie, J. Lu and M. Ng, (2022). Stochastic variance reduced gradient for affine rank minimization problem. arXiv: 2211.02802v1

    2022 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Jiang, R

    Q. Jiang, R. C. de Lamare, Y. Zakharov, S. Li and X. He, (2018). Knowledge-aided normalized iterative hard thresholding algorithms and applications to sparse reconstruction. arXiv:1809.09281

    2018 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Jiang, X

    T. Jiang, X. Zhao, H. Zhang and K. Michael, (2023). Dictionary learning with low-rank coding coefficients for tensor completion. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 34 (2), pp. 932-946

    2023

  26. [34]

    Johann, H

    A. Johann, H. Phien, H, Tuan and M. Do, (2017). Efficient tensor completion for color image and video recovery: low-rank tensor train. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 26 (5), pp. 2466-2479

    2017

  27. [35]

    Johnson and T

    R. Johnson and T. Zhang, (2013). Accelerating stochastic gradient descent using predictive variance reduction. NIPS’13: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 1, pp. 315–323

    2013

  28. [36]

    Kolda and B

    T. Kolda and B. Bader, (2009). Tensor decompositions and applications. SIAM review, 51, pp. 455-500

    2009

  29. [37]

    Z. Kong, L. Han, X. Liu and X. Yang, A New 4-D Nonlocal Transform-Domain Filter for 3-D Magnetic Resonance Images Denoising, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 941-954

  30. [38]

    X. Liu, S. Aeron, V. Aggarwal and X. Wang, (2020). Low-tubal-rank tensor completion using alternating minimization. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 66 (3), pp. 1714-1737

    2020

  31. [39]

    G. Li, J. Yang, W. Yang, Y. Wang, W. Wang, and L. Liu, (2017). 2D Normalized Iterative Hard Thresholding Algorithm for Fast Compressive Radar Imaging. Remote Sensing, 9(6), 619

    2017

  32. [40]

    S. Li, G. Tang, and M. B. Wakin, (2018). Simultaneous blind deconvolution and phase retrieval with tensor iterative hard thresholding. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 4184-4188

    2018

  33. [41]

    Y. Liu, Z. Long, H. Huang and C. Zhu, (2020). Low CP rank and Tucker rank tensor completion for estimating missing components in image data. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 30 (4), pp. 944-954

    2020

  34. [42]

    J. Liu, P. Musialski, P. Wonka and J. Ye, (2013). Tensor completion for estimating missing values in visual data. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 35 (1), pp. 208–220

    2013

  35. [43]

    J. Lu, C. Xu, Z. Hu, X. Liu, Q. Jiang, D. Meng and Z. Lin, (2022). A new nonlocal low-rank regularization method with applications to magnetic resonance image denoising. Inverse Problems, 38 065012

    2022

  36. [44]

    Z. Lu, Y. Zhang and J. Lu, (2017). ℓp Regularized low-rank approximation via iterative reweighted singular value minimization. Computational Optimization and Applications, 68, pp. 619–42

    2017

  37. [45]

    Z. Long, Y. Liu, L. Chen and C. Zhu, (2019). Low rank tensor completion for multiway visual data. Signal Processing, 155, pp. 301-316

    2019

  38. [46]

    Z. Long, C. Zhu, J. Liu and Y. Liu, (2021). Bayesian low rank tensor ring for image recovery. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 30, pp. 3568-3580

    2021

  39. [47]

    Matsumoto and A

    N. Matsumoto and A. Mazumdar. Binary iterative hard thresholding converges with optimal number of measurements for 1-bit compressed sensing. Journal of the ACM, 71(5):1–64, 2024

    2024

  40. [48]

    Monardo, A

    V. Monardo, A. Iyer, S. Donegan, M. De Graef and Y. Chi, (2021). Plug-And-Play image reconstruc- tion meets stochastic variance-reduced gradient methods. 2021 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), pp. 2868-2872

    2021

  41. [49]

    Nguyen, D

    N. Nguyen, D. Needell and T. Woolf, (2017). Linear convergence of stochastic iterative greedy algorithms with sparse constraints. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 63 (11), pp. 6869-6895

    2017

  42. [50]

    Ollila, (2015)

    E. Ollila, (2015). Multichannel sparse recovery of complex-valued signals using Huber’s criterion. arXiv:1504.04184. 11

    2015 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Ollila, (2015)

    E. Ollila, (2015). Nonparametric simultaneous sparse recovery: an application to source localization. arXiv: 1276226

    2015

  44. [52]

    Oseledets, (2011)

    I. Oseledets, (2011). Tensor-train decomposition. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 33 (5), pp. 2295–2317

    2011

  45. [53]

    J. Qin, S. Li, D. Needell, A. Ma, R, Grotheer, C. Huang and N. Durgin, (2021). Stochastic greedy algorithms for multiple measurement vectors. Inverse Problems and Imaging, 15 (1), pp. 79-107

    2021

  46. [54]

    Rauhut, R

    H. Rauhut, R. Schneider and ˇZ. Stojanac, (2017). Low-rank tensor recovery via iterative hard thresh- olding. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 523, pp. 220-262

    2017

  47. [55]

    Baraniuk, Volkan Cevher, Marco F

    Richard G. Baraniuk, Volkan Cevher, Marco F. Duarte, Chinmay Hegde, Model-based compressive sensing, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 56 (4) (2010) 1982–2001

    2010

  48. [56]

    H. Sato, H. Kasai and B. Mishra, (2019). Riemannian stochastic variance reduced gradient with retrac- tion and vector transport. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 29 (201), pp. 1444–1472

    2019

  49. [57]

    Shang, B

    F. Shang, B. Wei, H. Liu, Y. Liu, P. Zhou and M. Gong, (2022). Efficient gradient support pursuit with less hard thresholding for cardinality-constrained learning. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 33 (12), pp. 7806-7817

    2022

  50. [58]

    Q. Shen, Y. Chen, Y. Liang, S. Yi and W. Liu, (2022). Weighted schatten p-norm min- imization with logarithmic constraint for subspace clustering. Signal Processing, 198(9):108568. DOI:10.1016/j.sigpro.2022.108568

    2022

  51. [59]

    Shen, Bin

    Yi. Shen, Bin. Han, E. Braverman (2016). Adaptive frame-based color image denoising. Applied and computational Harmonic Analysis, 41(1), 54-74

    2016

  52. [60]

    Q. Shi, H. Lu, and Y. Cheung, Tensor rank estimation and completion via cp-based nuclear norm. CIKM ’17, (2017), 949-958

    2017

  53. [61]

    Toh and S

    K. Toh and S. Yun, (2010). An accelerated proximal gradient algorithm for nuclear norm regularized least squares problems. Pacific Journal Of Optimization, 6, pp. 615–640

    2010

  54. [62]

    C. Tan, S. Ma, Y. Dai and Y. Qian, (2016). Barzilai-borwein step size for stochastic gradient descent. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, (29)

    2016

  55. [63]

    Z. Tu, J. Lu, H. Zhu, H. Pan, W. Hu, Q. Jiang and Z. Lu, (2023). A new nonconvex low-rank tensor approximation method with applications to hyperspectral images denoising. Inverse Problems, 39 065003

    2023

  56. [64]

    Q. Wang, C. Cui and D. Han, (2023). Accelerated doubly stochastic gradient descent for tensor CP decomposition. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10957-023- 02193-5

    2023 doi

  57. [65]

    L. Wang, X. Zhang and Q. Gu, (2017). A unified variance reduction-based framework for nonconvex low-rank matrix recovery. 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, 70

    2017

  58. [66]

    W. Wang, V. Aggarwal and S. Aeron, (2017). Efficient low rank tensor ring completion. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), doi: 10.1109/ICCV.2017.607

    2017 doi

  59. [67]

    K. Wei, J. F. Cai, T. F. Chan and S. Leung, (2016). Guarantees of Riemannian Optimization for Low Rank Matrix Recovery. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.01562

    2016 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Xia and L

    Y. Xia and L. Zhou, (2023). Adaptive iterative hard thresholding for low-rank matrix recovery and rank-one measurements. Journal of Complexity, 76, 101725

    2023

  61. [69]

    T. Yu, X. Liu, Y. Dai and J. Sun, (2021). Stochastic variance reduced gradient methods using a trust- region-like scheme. Journal of Scientific Computing, 87. 12

    2021

  62. [70]

    T. Yu, X. Liu, Y. Dai and J. Sun, (2022). Variable metric proximal stochastic variance reduced gradient methods for nonconvex nonsmooth optimization. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 18 (4), pp. 2611–2631

    2022

  63. [71]

    H. Yang, H. Fang, C. Zhang and S. Wei, (2011). Iterative hard thresholding algorithm based on back- tracking. Acta Automatica Sinica, 37(3), pp. 276-282

    2011

  64. [72]

    L. Yang, M. Liu, J. Wang, X. Xie and J. Kuang, (2019). Tensor completion for recovering multichannel audio signal with missing data. China Communications, 16 (4), pp. 186-195

    2019

  65. [73]

    L. Yuan, J. Cao, X. Zhao, Q. Wu and Q. Zhao, (2018). Higher-dimension tensor completion via low- rank tensor ring decomposition. 2018 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC), doi: 10.23919/APSIPA.2018.8659708

    2018

  66. [74]

    L. Yuan, Z. Yu, W. Luo, Y. Hu, L. Feng and A. Zhu, (2015). A hierarchical tensor-based approach to compressing, updating and querying geospatial data, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 27 (2), pp. 312–325

    2015

  67. [75]

    Q. Zhao, G. Zhou, S. Xie, L. Zhang and A. Cichocki, (2016). Tensor ring decomposition. arxiv: 1606.05535

    2016 arXiv

  68. [76]

    X. Zhao, P. Du, T. Sun, and L. Cheng, (2017). Accelerated Hard Thresholding Algorithms for Sparse Recovery. Advances in Engineering Research (AER), 130, pp. 1322-1328

    2017

  69. [77]

    Zhang, L

    S. Zhang, L. Yang, J. Feng, W. Wei, Z. Cui, X. Xie and P. Yan, (2021). A tensor-network-based big data fusion framework for Cyber-Physical-Social Systems (CPSS). Information Fusion, 76 (C), pp. 337–354

    2021

  70. [78]

    G. Zhou, Q. Zhao, Y. Zhang, T. Adali, S. Xie and A. Cichocki, (2016). Linked component analysis from matrices to high-order tensors: applications to biomedical data. Proceedings of the IEEE, 104 (2), pp. 310–331

    2016

  71. [79]

    P. Zhou, C. Lu, J. Feng, Z. Lin and S. Yan, (2021). Tensor low-rank representation for data recovery and clustering. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 43 (5), pp. 1718-1732

    2021

  72. [80]

    Zhou, (2018)

    X. Zhou, (2018). On the fenchel duality between strong convexity and lipschitz continuous gradient. arXiv: 1803.06573

    2018 arXiv

  73. [81]

    X. Zhou, Z. Liu, H. Zhang, Z. Zhao, and Y. Liu, (2025). Key parameters for iterative thresholding-type algorithm with nonconvex regularization. Digital Signal Processing, 164, 105246

    2025

  74. [82]

    Zheng, T

    Y. Zheng, T. Huang, X. Zhao, Q. Zhao and T. Jiang, (2021). Fully-connected tensor network decomposi- tion and its application to higher-order tensor completion. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence18

    2021

  75. [83]

    Zheng, T

    Y. Zheng, T. Huang, X. Zhao, Q. Zhao, T. Jiang, T. Ji and T. Ma, (2020). Tensor n-tubal rank and its convex relaxation for low-rank tensor completion. Information Science, 532, pp. 170–189. 13

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.