Physical-Support Confidence Sets for Highly Coherent Dictionaries
Abstract
Sparse pursuit after dictionary learning can yield a precise atom support even when its physical interpretation is not justified by the calibration data, especially for highly coherent dictionaries where alternative calibration-compatible dictionaries may assign different physical meanings to the same selected support. We develop resolution-aware physical-support inference that jointly accounts for uncertainty in the learned dictionary and in the representation of a deployment signal. Our cross-...
Description / Details
Sparse pursuit after dictionary learning can yield a precise atom support even when its physical interpretation is not justified by the calibration data, especially for highly coherent dictionaries where alternative calibration-compatible dictionaries may assign different physical meanings to the same selected support. We develop resolution-aware physical-support inference that jointly accounts for uncertainty in the learned dictionary and in the representation of a deployment signal. Our cross-dictionary confidence correspondence retains calibration-compatible dictionaries and deployment-compatible sparse representations, then projects the surviving explanations onto physical-support space. For local coherent-atom classes with separation scale s, once the deployment data resolve the coherent-block explanation and its atom support, the minimax physical resolution from N calibration signals satisfies , with relative resolution governed by the orientation-information scale . Deployment replication improves physical localization only when orientation changes cannot be absorbed by adjusting the active coefficients. For computation, we introduce active endpoint bracketing (AEB), an adaptive finite-bank procedure that evaluates only candidates that can still affect the physical report and otherwise safely coarsens or abstains. Finite-bank experiments, including a four-region synthetic application, show that a point-valued plug-in selector can be physically overprecise, whereas AEB avoids unsupported refinement with fewer candidate evaluations.
Source: arXiv:2608.20295v1 - http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.20295v1 PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2608.20295v1 Original Link: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.20295v1
Please sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!
Aug 21, 2026
Chemical Engineering
Engineering
0