Nice book on convex optimization techniques
stanford.edu
stanford.edu
Those of you who may be interested in convex optimization may want to take a look at these "MIT OCW-like" pages:
http://see.stanford.edu/SEE/courseinfo.aspx?coll=2db7ced4-39... http://see.stanford.edu/SEE/courseinfo.aspx?coll=523bbab2-dc...
and those who are interested in convex optimization and Python programming, might want to take a look at these:
if you take the time to honestly follow the text you come away with a great understanding of convex optimization... both the theory and the methods.
Apparently they use "compressive sampling" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_sensing) in conjunction with the convex optimization so they can avoid building the superfast A-to-D that you'd normally need to cover such a frequency range.
You can apparently prove that it'll always find the narrowband signal, as long as it's narrow enough.
If you want to know who's broadcasting anywhere in the range from 1MHz to 10GHz (example only -- I don't know the real range for this device), that's a bandwidth of 9.999 GHz.
You could scan freqencies sequentially, but it's slow and you might miss something. You can't afford to build a 20 GHz A-to-D converter, and even if you could, you don't want to build a computer big enough to process the resulting 80 GB/s data stream (assuming a 40 GHz sample rate with 16-bit samples).
The compressive sampling process is what allows you to sample at a lower rate (as long as you can assume that the signal you're looking for doesn't use too much of the total bandwidth). The convex optimization is apparently used to decide how to do the sampling in a way that's guaranteed to recover your signal.
The underlying compressive sensing theory says that if you do a measurement of a sparse signal, then convex optimization should allow you to recover that signal with high to overwhelming probability. The reason compressive sensing is interesting is that: - the process of taking measurement is linear (no iteration a la JPEG), thereby allowing one to foresee very low powered sensors. - the number of measurements is expected to be much smaller than what the Nyquist-Shannon theorem says (Nyquist is just a sufficient condition, not a necessary one), thereby realizing a de-facto compression of the signal with no a priori on the shape of that signal (except the knowledge that it is sparse) - the measurements are automatically encrypted.
In the case of the broad-spectrum communications monitor, the message is known to be sparsely located all over the frequencies.
Igor.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query...
a person has pit all the videos in notes and put the said notes on a blog:
http://minhva.blogspot.com/2009/02/convexoptimizationii-lect...
so you can watch the video and read the text of the video at the same time.
Igor.
http://igorcarron.googlepages.com/compressedsensinghardware
One should note that while convex optimization has given some real impetus to the field (by providing theoretical bounds), signal reconstruction is also using speedier techniques nowadays even though linear programming techniques remains some sort of gold standard. For those of you interested in the subject, I write a small blog on the subject of CS:
http://nuit-blanche.blogspot.com/search/label/CS
and have written a page trying to summarize our current understanding in this page(it is a bit technical):
http://igorcarron.googlepages.com/cs
Cheers,
Igor.
ok, so a simple example: lets say you're on a hacker's budget and you want to maximize your caloric intake given your limited funds. This is your objective function. BUT, if you're like me, you can't live on ramen and mountain dew... i have a basic set of nutritional requirements. These are your constraints. For example, sodium has to be less than A and protein greater than B and so on and so forth. So you are essentially optimizing over ALL possible diets.
My guess is you'd end getting back: kale, potatoes and beans. Now that's a real hacker's diet!