Slide 1

Slide 1 text

Gabriel Peyré www.numerical-tours.com Exact Support Recovery for Sparse Spikes Deconvolution Joint work with Vincent Duval & Quentin Denoyelle VISI N

Slide 2

Slide 2 text

Sparse Deconvolution Neural spikes (1D) y m0 = ? ginal Signal m0 t 1 x2 x3 ⇤ Low-pass filter ' t 0.5 0.5 + Noise w 0 1 + y = ' ? m0 + w m0 is “sparse” ' w

Slide 3

Slide 3 text

Sparse Deconvolution Neural spikes (1D) Seismic imaging (1.5D) y m0 = ? ginal Signal m0 t 1 x2 x3 ⇤ Low-pass filter ' t 0.5 0.5 + Noise w 0 1 + y = ' ? m0 + w m0 is “sparse” ' w

Slide 4

Slide 4 text

Sparse Deconvolution Neural spikes (1D) Astrophysics (2D) Seismic imaging (1.5D) y m0 = ? ginal Signal m0 t 1 x2 x3 ⇤ Low-pass filter ' t 0.5 0.5 + Noise w 0 1 + y = ' ? m0 + w m0 is “sparse” ' w

Slide 5

Slide 5 text

Sparse Deconvolution Neural spikes (1D) Astrophysics (2D) Seismic imaging (1.5D) y m0 = ? ginal Signal m0 t 1 x2 x3 ⇤ Low-pass filter ' t 0.5 0.5 + Noise w 0 1 + y = ' ? m0 + w m0 is “sparse” Presented results n D problems extend to ' w

Slide 6

Slide 6 text

Overview • Sparse Spikes Super-resolution • Robust Support Recovery • Asymptotic Positive Measure Recovery

Slide 7

Slide 7 text

Radon measure m on T = ( R/Z ) d . Deconvolution of Measures m

Slide 8

Slide 8 text

Discrete measure: ma,x = P N i =1 ai xi , a 2 RN , x 2 TN Radon measure m on T = ( R/Z ) d . Deconvolution of Measures m a,x m

Slide 9

Slide 9 text

Discrete measure: ma,x = P N i =1 ai xi , a 2 RN , x 2 TN Radon measure m on T = ( R/Z ) d . Deconvolution of Measures m a,x m ' 2 C2(T ⇥ T) y = (m) + w ( m ) = Z T ' ( x, ·)d m ( x ) Linear measurements:

Slide 10

Slide 10 text

y Discrete measure: ma,x = P N i =1 ai xi , a 2 RN , x 2 TN Radon measure m on T = ( R/Z ) d . Deconvolution of Measures m a,x ' m ' 2 C2(T ⇥ T) y = (m) + w ( m ) = Z T ' ( x, ·)d m ( x ) Linear measurements: Example: 1-D ( d = 1) convolution ' ( x, t ) = ' ( t x )

Slide 11

Slide 11 text

y Discrete measure: ma,x = P N i =1 ai xi , a 2 RN , x 2 TN Minimum separation: = mini6=j | xi xj | ! Signal-dependent recovery criteria. Radon measure m on T = ( R/Z ) d . Deconvolution of Measures m a,x ' = 2/fc y = 0.5/fc m ' 2 C2(T ⇥ T) y = (m) + w ( m ) = Z T ' ( x, ·)d m ( x ) Linear measurements: Example: 1-D ( d = 1) convolution ' ( x, t ) = ' ( t x )

Slide 12

Slide 12 text

Discrete `1 regularization: Computation grid z = ( zk) K k=1. Sparse l1 Deconvolution y zk

Slide 13

Slide 13 text

Discrete `1 regularization: Computation grid z = ( zk) K k=1. Basis-pursuit / Lasso: Sparse l1 Deconvolution y zk ¯ : a 2 RK 7! (ma,z) = X k ak'(zk, ·) 2 Im( ) min a2RN 1 2 ||y ¯a||2 + ||a||1

Slide 14

Slide 14 text

Discrete `1 regularization: Computation grid z = ( zk) K k=1. Basis-pursuit / Lasso: Sparse l1 Deconvolution y zk ¯ : a 2 RK 7! (ma,z) = X k ak'(zk, ·) 2 Im( ) min a2RN 1 2 ||y ¯a||2 + ||a||1 Why `1? q = 0 a1 a2 “`0 ball”

Slide 15

Slide 15 text

Discrete `1 regularization: Computation grid z = ( zk) K k=1. Basis-pursuit / Lasso: Sparse l1 Deconvolution y zk ¯ : a 2 RK 7! (ma,z) = X k ak'(zk, ·) 2 Im( ) min a2RN 1 2 ||y ¯a||2 + ||a||1 q = 1 q = 2 q = 3/2 q = 1/2 Why `1? `q ball a 2 RK ; P k |ak |q 6 1 q = 0 a1 a2 “`0 ball” !

Slide 16

Slide 16 text

Discrete `1 regularization: Computation grid z = ( zk) K k=1. Basis-pursuit / Lasso: Sparse l1 Deconvolution y zk ¯ : a 2 RK 7! (ma,z) = X k ak'(zk, ·) 2 Im( ) min a2RN 1 2 ||y ¯a||2 + ||a||1 q = 1 q = 2 q = 3/2 q = 1/2 Why `1? `q ball a 2 RK ; P k |ak |q 6 1 q = 0 a1 a2 sparse “`0 ball” !

Slide 17

Slide 17 text

Discrete `1 regularization: Computation grid z = ( zk) K k=1. Basis-pursuit / Lasso: Sparse l1 Deconvolution y zk ¯ : a 2 RK 7! (ma,z) = X k ak'(zk, ·) 2 Im( ) min a2RN 1 2 ||y ¯a||2 + ||a||1 q = 1 q = 2 q = 3/2 q = 1/2 Why `1? `q ball a 2 RK ; P k |ak |q 6 1 q = 0 a1 a2 sparse convex “`0 ball” !

Slide 18

Slide 18 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1

Slide 19

Slide 19 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x

Slide 20

Slide 20 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 |m a,x |(T) = ||a|| ` 1 m a,x |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x

Slide 21

Slide 21 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 |m a,x |(T) = ||a|| ` 1 m a,x |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x

Slide 22

Slide 22 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 min m 1 2 || (m) y||2 + |m|(T) (P (y)) Sparse recovery: |m a,x |(T) = ||a|| ` 1 m a,x |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x

Slide 23

Slide 23 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 min m 1 2 || (m) y||2 + |m|(T) (P (y)) Sparse recovery: (P0(y)) min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} ! 0+ |m a,x |(T) = ||a|| ` 1 m a,x |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x

Slide 24

Slide 24 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 min m 1 2 || (m) y||2 + |m|(T) (P (y)) Sparse recovery: (P0(y)) min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} ! 0+ |m a,x |(T) = ||a|| ` 1 m a,x |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x Proposition: If dim(Im( )) < +1, 9( a, x ) 2 RN ⇥ TN with N 6 dim(Im( )) such that m a,x is a solution to P ( y ).

Slide 25

Slide 25 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 ! Algorithms: [Bredies, Pikkarainen, 2010] (proximal-based) [Cand` es, Fernandez-G. 2012] (root finding) min m 1 2 || (m) y||2 + |m|(T) (P (y)) Sparse recovery: (P0(y)) min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} ! 0+ |m a,x |(T) = ||a|| ` 1 m a,x |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x Proposition: If dim(Im( )) < +1, 9( a, x ) 2 RN ⇥ TN with N 6 dim(Im( )) such that m a,x is a solution to P ( y ).

Slide 26

Slide 26 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 ! Algorithms: [Bredies, Pikkarainen, 2010] (proximal-based) [Cand` es, Fernandez-G. 2012] (root finding) min m 1 2 || (m) y||2 + |m|(T) (P (y)) Sparse recovery: (P0(y)) min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} ! 0+ Competitors: Prony’s methods (MUSIC, ESPRIT, FRI). |m a,x |(T) = ||a|| ` 1 m a,x |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x Proposition: If dim(Im( )) < +1, 9( a, x ) 2 RN ⇥ TN with N 6 dim(Im( )) such that m a,x is a solution to P ( y ).

Slide 27

Slide 27 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 ! Algorithms: [Bredies, Pikkarainen, 2010] (proximal-based) [Cand` es, Fernandez-G. 2012] (root finding) min m 1 2 || (m) y||2 + |m|(T) (P (y)) Sparse recovery: (P0(y)) min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} ! 0+ Competitors: Prony’s methods (MUSIC, ESPRIT, FRI). “+”: always works when w = 0, less sensitive to sign. |m a,x |(T) = ||a|| ` 1 m a,x |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x Proposition: If dim(Im( )) < +1, 9( a, x ) 2 RN ⇥ TN with N 6 dim(Im( )) such that m a,x is a solution to P ( y ).

Slide 28

Slide 28 text

Grid-free Sparse Recovery Grid-free regularization: total variation of measures: |m|(T) = sup R ⌘dm : ⌘ 2 C(T), ||⌘||1 6 1 ! Algorithms: [Bredies, Pikkarainen, 2010] (proximal-based) [Cand` es, Fernandez-G. 2012] (root finding) min m 1 2 || (m) y||2 + |m|(T) (P (y)) Sparse recovery: (P0(y)) min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} ! 0+ Competitors: Prony’s methods (MUSIC, ESPRIT, FRI). “+”: always works when w = 0, less sensitive to sign. “-”: only for convolution operator, '(x, t) = '(x t) |m a,x |(T) = ||a|| ` 1 m a,x |m|(T) = R |f| = ||f||L1 d m ( x ) = f ( x )d x Proposition: If dim(Im( )) < +1, 9( a, x ) 2 RN ⇥ TN with N 6 dim(Im( )) such that m a,x is a solution to P ( y ).

Slide 29

Slide 29 text

Overview • Sparse Spikes Super-resolution • Robust Support Recovery • Asymptotic Positive Measure Recovery

Slide 30

Slide 30 text

(P0(y)) Robustness and Support-stability = 0.55/fc = 0.45/fc = 0.1/fc = 0.3/fc min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} Low-pass filter supp( ˆ ' ) = [ fc, fc]. When is m0 solution of P0( m0) ?

Slide 31

Slide 31 text

(P0(y)) Robustness and Support-stability = 0.55/fc = 0.45/fc = 0.1/fc = 0.3/fc min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} Low-pass filter supp( ˆ ' ) = [ fc, fc]. When is m0 solution of P0( m0) ? Theorem: [Cand` es, Fernandez G.] > 1.26 fc ) m0 solves P0( m0).

Slide 32

Slide 32 text

(P0(y)) Robustness and Support-stability = 0.55/fc = 0.45/fc = 0.1/fc = 0.3/fc min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} Low-pass filter supp( ˆ ' ) = [ fc, fc]. are solutions of P ( m0 + w )? How close to m0 When is m0 solution of P0( m0) ? Theorem: [Cand` es, Fernandez G.] > 1.26 fc ) m0 solves P0( m0).

Slide 33

Slide 33 text

! [Cand` es, Fernandez-G. 2012] (P0(y)) Robustness and Support-stability = 0.55/fc = 0.45/fc = 0.1/fc = 0.3/fc min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} Low-pass filter supp( ˆ ' ) = [ fc, fc]. are solutions of P ( m0 + w )? ! [Fernandez-G.][de Castro 2012] Weighted L2 error: Support localization: How close to m0 When is m0 solution of P0( m0) ? Theorem: [Cand` es, Fernandez G.] > 1.26 fc ) m0 solves P0( m0).

Slide 34

Slide 34 text

! [Cand` es, Fernandez-G. 2012] (P0(y)) Robustness and Support-stability = 0.55/fc = 0.45/fc = 0.1/fc = 0.3/fc min m {|m|(T) ; m = y} Low-pass filter supp( ˆ ' ) = [ fc, fc]. are solutions of P ( m0 + w )? ! [Fernandez-G.][de Castro 2012] General kernels? Exact support recovery? Open problems: Weighted L2 error: Support localization: How close to m0 When is m0 solution of P0( m0) ? Theorem: [Cand` es, Fernandez G.] > 1.26 fc ) m0 solves P0( m0).

Slide 35

Slide 35 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) 9

Slide 36

Slide 36 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) 9 = min m h sup ||⌘||1 61 h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i

Slide 37

Slide 37 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) 9 m 2 @◆||·||1 61 (⌘) = min m h sup ||⌘||1 61 h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i

Slide 38

Slide 38 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) 9 m 2 @◆||·||1 61 (⌘) = min m h sup ||⌘||1 61 h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i = sup ||⌘||1 61 h min m h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i

Slide 39

Slide 39 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) 9 Ideal low-pass filter: ! ⌘ = ⇤p trigonometric polynomial. m 2 @◆||·||1 61 (⌘) ⌘ = ⇤ m y = ⇤p = min m h sup ||⌘||1 61 h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i = sup ||⌘||1 61 h min m h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i

Slide 40

Slide 40 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) 9 Ideal low-pass filter: ! ⌘ = ⇤p trigonometric polynomial. m 2 @◆||·||1 61 (⌘) ⌘ = ⇤ m y = ⇤p = min m h sup ||⌘||1 61 h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i = sup ||⌘||1 61 h min m h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i D (y) = sup || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2

Slide 41

Slide 41 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) 9 Ideal low-pass filter: ! ⌘ = ⇤p trigonometric polynomial. m 2 @◆||·||1 61 (⌘) , ⌘ 2 @|m|(T) ⌘ = ⇤ m y = ⇤p = min m h sup ||⌘||1 61 h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i = sup ||⌘||1 61 h min m h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i D (y) = sup || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2

Slide 42

Slide 42 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) ⇢ ⌘ ; 8 t, | ⌘ ( t )| 6 1 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) @|m a,x |(T) = 9 Ideal low-pass filter: ! ⌘ = ⇤p trigonometric polynomial. m 2 @◆||·||1 61 (⌘) , ⌘ 2 @|m|(T) ⌘ = ⇤ m y = ⇤p = min m h sup ||⌘||1 61 h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i = sup ||⌘||1 61 h min m h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i D (y) = sup || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2

Slide 43

Slide 43 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) ⇢ ⌘ ; 8 t, | ⌘ ( t )| 6 1 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) @|m a,x |(T) = 9 ! Interpolates spikes location and sign. Ideal low-pass filter: ! ⌘ = ⇤p trigonometric polynomial. m 2 @◆||·||1 61 (⌘) , ⌘ 2 @|m|(T) ⌘ = ⇤ m y = ⇤p = min m h sup ||⌘||1 61 h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i = sup ||⌘||1 61 h min m h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i D (y) = sup || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2

Slide 44

Slide 44 text

From Primal to Dual min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) ⇢ ⌘ ; 8 t, | ⌘ ( t )| 6 1 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) @|m a,x |(T) = 9 ! Interpolates spikes location and sign. ! |⌘ ( t ) |2 = 1: polynomial equation of supp( m ). Ideal low-pass filter: ! ⌘ = ⇤p trigonometric polynomial. m 2 @◆||·||1 61 (⌘) , ⌘ 2 @|m|(T) ⌘ = ⇤ m y = ⇤p = min m h sup ||⌘||1 61 h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i = sup ||⌘||1 61 h min m h⌘, mi + 1 2 || m y||2 i D (y) = sup || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2

Slide 45

Slide 45 text

Asymptotic Dual and Certificate min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) D (y) p def. = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2

Slide 46

Slide 46 text

Asymptotic Dual and Certificate min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) D (y) P0(y) ! 0+ m0 2 argmin m=y |m|(T) p def. = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2

Slide 47

Slide 47 text

Asymptotic Dual and Certificate min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) D (y) P0(y) ! 0+ m0 2 argmin m=y |m|(T) D0(y) D0( y ) = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi p def. = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2

Slide 48

Slide 48 text

Asymptotic Dual and Certificate min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) D (y) P0(y) ! 0+ m0 2 argmin m=y |m|(T) p0 def. = argmax p2D0(y) 1 2 ||p||2 ! 0+ D0(y) D0( y ) = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi p def. = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2

Slide 49

Slide 49 text

Asymptotic Dual and Certificate min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) D (y) P0(y) ! 0+ m0 2 argmin m=y |m|(T) p0 def. = argmax p2D0(y) 1 2 ||p||2 ! 0+ D0(y) D0( y ) = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi p def. = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2 D0(y) = {p ; ⇤p 2 @|m0 |(T)} Lemma:

Slide 50

Slide 50 text

Asymptotic Dual and Certificate min m |m|(T) + 1 2 || m y||2 P (y) D (y) P0(y) ! 0+ m0 2 argmin m=y |m|(T) p0 def. = argmax p2D0(y) 1 2 ||p||2 ! 0+ D0(y) D0( y ) = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi = 1/fc = 0.6/fc ⌘0 ⌘0 p def. = argmax || ⇤p||1 61 hp, yi 2 ||p||2 D0(y) = {p ; ⇤p 2 @|m0 |(T)} Lemma: Definition: for any m0 solution of P0( y ), ⌘0 = ⇤p0 = argmin ⌘= ⇤p2@|m0 |(T) ||p||

Slide 51

Slide 51 text

−1 1 η 0 η V Vanishing Derivative Pre-certificate 9⌘0 () m0 solves P0( m0) Input measure: m0 = m a,x . ⌘0 def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p || p || s.t. ⇢ 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) , || ⌘ ||1 6 1 .

Slide 52

Slide 52 text

−1 1 η 0 η V ⌘0 = ⌘V Vanishing Derivative Pre-certificate 9⌘0 () m0 solves P0( m0) Input measure: m0 = m a,x . ⌘0 def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p || p || s.t. ⇢ 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) , || ⌘ ||1 6 1 . ⌘V def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p || p || s.t. ⇢ 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) , 8 i, ⌘ 0( xi) = 0 .

Slide 53

Slide 53 text

−1 1 η 0 η V ⌘0 = ⌘V Vanishing Derivative Pre-certificate 9⌘0 () m0 solves P0( m0) Input measure: m0 = m a,x . ⌘0 def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p || p || s.t. ⇢ 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) , || ⌘ ||1 6 1 . ⌘V def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p || p || s.t. ⇢ 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) , 8 i, ⌘ 0( xi) = 0 . where Ax ( b ) = P i b 1 i ' ( xi, ·) + b 2 i ' 0( xi, ·) Proposition: ⌘ V = ⇤A+ x (sign(a); 0)

Slide 54

Slide 54 text

−1 1 η 0 η V ⌘0 = ⌘V Vanishing Derivative Pre-certificate 9⌘0 () m0 solves P0( m0) Input measure: m0 = m a,x . ⌘0 def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p || p || s.t. ⇢ 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) , || ⌘ ||1 6 1 . ⌘V def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p || p || s.t. ⇢ 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) , 8 i, ⌘ 0( xi) = 0 . () Non-degenerate certificate: ⌘ 2 ND(m a,x ) : 8 t / 2 { x1, . . . , xN } , | ⌘ ( t )| < 1 and 8 i, ⌘ 00( xi) 6= 0 where Ax ( b ) = P i b 1 i ' ( xi, ·) + b 2 i ' 0( xi, ·) Proposition: ⌘ V = ⇤A+ x (sign(a); 0)

Slide 55

Slide 55 text

−1 1 η 0 η V ⌘0 6= ⌘V −1 1 η 0 η V ⌘0 = ⌘V Vanishing Derivative Pre-certificate 9⌘0 () m0 solves P0( m0) Theorem: ⌘V 2 ND(m0) =) ⌘V = ⌘0 Input measure: m0 = m a,x . ⌘0 def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p || p || s.t. ⇢ 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) , || ⌘ ||1 6 1 . ⌘V def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p || p || s.t. ⇢ 8 i, ⌘ ( xi) = sign( ai) , 8 i, ⌘ 0( xi) = 0 . () Non-degenerate certificate: ⌘ 2 ND(m a,x ) : 8 t / 2 { x1, . . . , xN } , | ⌘ ( t )| < 1 and 8 i, ⌘ 00( xi) 6= 0 where Ax ( b ) = P i b 1 i ' ( xi, ·) + b 2 i ' 0( xi, ·) Proposition: ⌘ V = ⇤A+ x (sign(a); 0)

Slide 56

Slide 56 text

Support Stability Theorem ⌘ = ⇤p !0 ! ⌘0 = ⇤p0 supp(m ) ⇢ {|⌘ | = 1}

Slide 57

Slide 57 text

Support Stability Theorem ⌘ = ⇤p !0 ! ⌘0 = ⇤p0 supp(m ) ⇢ {|⌘ | = 1} If ⌘0 2 ND(m0) then supp(m ) ! supp(m0) ⌘0 ⌘ x1 x2 x ? 2 x ? 1

Slide 58

Slide 58 text

Support Stability Theorem x ? i max Noiseless w = 0. min ⇠ ||w|| x ? i max ||w|| ⌘ = ⇤p !0 ! ⌘0 = ⇤p0 supp(m ) ⇢ {|⌘ | = 1} If ⌘0 2 ND(m0) then supp(m ) ! supp(m0) ⌘0 ⌘ x1 x2 x ? 2 x ? 1 Theorem: the solution of P ( y ) for y = ( m0) + w is for ( ||w||/ , ) = O (1), [Duval, Peyr´ e 2014] If ⌘ V 2 ND( m0) for m0 = m a,x, then m = P N i =1 a? i x ? i where ||(x, a) (x? , a?)|| = O(||w||)

Slide 59

Slide 59 text

When is Non-degenerate ? ⌘V ' ' ⌘V ⌘V ⌘V ⌘V ⌘V ⌘V Input measure: m0 = m a, x , ! 0

Slide 60

Slide 60 text

When is Non-degenerate ? ⌘V ' ' ⌘V ⌘V ⌘V ⌘V ⌘V ⌘V Input measure: Theorem: [Tang, Recht, 2013] Valid for: ' ( x ) = e x 2 / 2 ' ( x ) = (1 + ( x/ )2) 1 . . . 9C, ( > C ) = ) ( ⌘V is non degenerate) m0 = m a, x , ! 0

Slide 61

Slide 61 text

Overview • Sparse Spikes Super-resolution • Robust Support Recovery • Asymptotic Positive Measure Recovery

Slide 62

Slide 62 text

Recovery of Positive Measures m = ( R e 2i⇡ktdm(t))fc k= fc Theorem: let and [de Castro et al. 2011] ! m0 is recovered when there is no noise. ⌘S( t ) = 1 ⇢ QN i=1 sin( ⇡ ( t xi))2 for N 6 fc and ⇢ small enough, ⌘S 2 ¯ D ( m0). -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 ⌘S ⌘S ⌘S ⌘S Input measure: m0 = m a,x where a 2 RN + .

Slide 63

Slide 63 text

Recovery of Positive Measures m = ( R e 2i⇡ktdm(t))fc k= fc Theorem: let and [de Castro et al. 2011] ! m0 is recovered when there is no noise. ⌘S( t ) = 1 ⇢ QN i=1 sin( ⇡ ( t xi))2 for N 6 fc and ⇢ small enough, ⌘S 2 ¯ D ( m0). -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 ⌘S ⌘S ⌘S ⌘S [Morgenshtern, Cand` es, 2015] discrete `1 robustness. [Demanet, Nguyen, 2015] discrete `0 robustness. Input measure: m0 = m a,x where a 2 RN + . ! behavior as 8 i, xi ! 0 ?

Slide 64

Slide 64 text

Recovery of Positive Measures m = ( R e 2i⇡ktdm(t))fc k= fc Theorem: let and [de Castro et al. 2011] ! m0 is recovered when there is no noise. ! noise robustness of support recovery ? ⌘S( t ) = 1 ⇢ QN i=1 sin( ⇡ ( t xi))2 for N 6 fc and ⇢ small enough, ⌘S 2 ¯ D ( m0). -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 ⌘S ⌘S ⌘S ⌘S [Morgenshtern, Cand` es, 2015] discrete `1 robustness. [Demanet, Nguyen, 2015] discrete `0 robustness. Input measure: m0 = m a,x where a 2 RN + . ! behavior as 8 i, xi ! 0 ?

Slide 65

Slide 65 text

Comparison of Certificates -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 ⌘S ⌘V

Slide 66

Slide 66 text

Asymptotic of Vanishing Certificate 1 ⌘V Vanishing Derivative pre-certificate: ⌘V def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p ||p|| m0 = m a, x where ! 0 s.t. 8 i, ⇢ ⌘ ( xi) = 1 , ⌘ 0( xi) = 0 .

Slide 67

Slide 67 text

Asymptotic of Vanishing Certificate 1 ⌘V 1 1 1 ⌘V ⌘V ⌘W Vanishing Derivative pre-certificate: ⌘V def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p ||p|| m0 = m a, x where ! 0 s.t. 8 i, ⇢ ⌘ ( xi) = 1 , ⌘ 0( xi) = 0 .

Slide 68

Slide 68 text

Asymptotic of Vanishing Certificate 1 ⌘V 1 1 1 ⌘V ⌘V ⌘W s.t. ⇢ ⌘(0) = 1, ⌘0(0) = . . . = ⌘(2N 1)(0) = 0. Asymptotic pre-certificate: ⌘W def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p ||p|| Vanishing Derivative pre-certificate: ⌘V def. = argmin ⌘= ⇤p ||p|| ! 0 m0 = m a, x where ! 0 s.t. 8 i, ⇢ ⌘ ( xi) = 1 , ⌘ 0( xi) = 0 .

Slide 69

Slide 69 text

Asymptotic Certificate 1 1 1 1 ⌘V = ⌘W ⌘W ⌘W ⌘W N = 1 N = 2 N = 3 N = 4 (2N 1) -Non degenerate: () ⌘W (2N)(0) 6= 0 ⇢ 8 t 6= 0, |⌘W (t)| < 1 ⌘W 2 NDN

Slide 70

Slide 70 text

Asymptotic Certificate 1 1 1 1 ⌘V = ⌘W ⌘W ⌘W ⌘W N = 1 N = 2 N = 3 N = 4 (2N 1) -Non degenerate: () ⌘W (2N)(0) 6= 0 ⇢ 8 t 6= 0, |⌘W (t)| < 1 ⌘W 2 NDN Lemma: ! ⌘W govern stability as ! 0. If ⌘W 2 NDN , 9 0 > 0, 8 < 0, ⌘ V 2 ND(m x,a )

Slide 71

Slide 71 text

Asymptotic Robustness Theorem: the solution of P ( y ) for y = ( m0) + w is for w , w 2N 1 , 2N 1 = O (1) P N i =1 a? i x ? i ||w || N = 2 ||w || N = 1 If ⌘ W 2 ND N , letting m0 = m a, x , then where ||(x, a) (x?, a?)|| = O ✓ ||w|| + 2N 1 ◆ [Denoyelle, D., P. 2015]

Slide 72

Slide 72 text

Asymptotic Robustness Theorem: the solution of P ( y ) for y = ( m0) + w is x ? i 0 ↵ < 2N 1 Noise: w = w0. for w , w 2N 1 , 2N 1 = O (1) P N i =1 a? i x ? i Regularization: = 0 ↵ 0 max ↵ = 2N 1 x ? i x0 ||w || N = 2 ||w || N = 1 If ⌘ W 2 ND N , letting m0 = m a, x , then where ||(x, a) (x?, a?)|| = O ✓ ||w|| + 2N 1 ◆ y = m a, x + w [Denoyelle, D., P. 2015]

Slide 73

Slide 73 text

When is Non-degenerate ? ⌘W Proposition: one has ⌘(2N) W (0) < 0. ! “locally” non-degenerate.

Slide 74

Slide 74 text

When is Non-degenerate ? ⌘W Proposition: one has ⌘(2N) W (0) < 0. ! “locally” non-degenerate. ' ˆ ' ⌘W ⌘W ⌘W N = 2 N = 3 N = 4

Slide 75

Slide 75 text

Gaussian Deconvolution Gaussian convolution: ' ( x, t ) = e | x t |2 2 2 Proposition: ⌘W ( x ) = e x 2 4 2 N 1 X k=0 ( x/ 2 )2k k ! In particular, ⌘W is non-degenerate. ( m ) def. = Z ' ( x, ·)d m ( x ) 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1 1 1 1 ! Gaussian deconvolution is support-stable. N = 1 N = 2 N = 3 N = 4 '(0, ·) ⌘W ⌘W ⌘W ⌘W

Slide 76

Slide 76 text

Laplace Transform Inversion ( m ) def. = Z ' ( x, ·)d m ( x ) ' ( x, t ) = e xt Laplace transform: ' ( x, ·) x = 2 x = 20 t [with E. Soubies]

Slide 77

Slide 77 text

Laplace Transform Inversion ( m ) def. = Z ' ( x, ·)d m ( x ) ' ( x, t ) = e xt Laplace transform: ' ( x, ·) x = 2 x = 20 t (m1) (m2) x m1 t m2 x [with E. Soubies]

Slide 78

Slide 78 text

Laplace Transform Inversion ( m ) def. = Z ' ( x, ·)d m ( x ) ' ( x, t ) = e xt Laplace transform: ' ( x, ·) x = 2 x = 20 Total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy (TIRFM) t (m1) (m2) x m1 t m2 x [with E. Soubies] [Boulanger et al. 2014] varying the azimuth φ during the exposure time and can be modeled by the following expression: gðθÞ = Z2π 0 Z∞ 0 Z∞ −∞ Iðz; α; φÞρ θ − α Ω=cos θ f À z Á dαdzdφ; where fðzÞ is the density of fluorophores in the medium con- volved by the emission point spread function and ρð · Þ represents the laser beam profile of divergence Ω. The function Iðz; α; φÞ slope of the glass slide recovered (Fig. 2D), the latter falling within the confidence interval deducted from the accuracy of the mea- surement of the different characteristic dimensions of the sample. Finally, from the dispersion of the estimated depth around the average slope (Fig. 2D), we can conclude that the localization precision obtained with this approach is higher than the corre- sponding precision given by estimating the location of the beads in the WF image stack as already mentioned (17). Estimating the 3D density of fluorophores convolved by the emission point spread function then would simply boil down to inverting the linear system. Some care has to be taken when inverting such system, as the inverse problem is at best badly con- ditioned. Nevertheless, constraints can be imposed to the solution such as positivity, and, in the case of time-lapse acquisitions, a multiframe regularization can be used in addition to the spatial and temporal regularization smoothness to solve the reconstruction problem. Moreover, to be effective, such a positivity constraint requires a correct knowledge of the background level. As a conse- quence, for each multiangle image stack, a background image is obtained by driving the beam out of the objective. Given that several convex constraints have to be satisfied at the same time, we propose to rely on a flavor of the PPXA algorithm (26) to estimate the tridimensional density of fluorophores (Fig. S4). More detailed information on how noise, object depth, and the required number of angles can be taken into account is discussed in SI Imaging Model and Reconstruction and Fig. S5. Finally, to take into account the variations of the medium index, we select an effective index within a predefined range by minimizing the reconstruction error at each pixel under a spatial smoothness constraint (Fig. S6). It is worth noting that the computation time for the reconstruction on 10 planes from a stack 512 × 512 images corresponding to 21 in- cidence angles ranges from 1 to 5 min depending on the number of iterations. Imaging in Vitro and in Vivo Actin Assembly. The proposed multi- angle TIRF image reconstruction approach was then tested on complex samples such as actin network architectures for which spatial resolution and dynamics remain an issue. We first chal- lenged the spatial organization of actin nucleation geometry using an in vitro assay based on micropatterning method (27). A B C D Fig. 2. Experimental validation of the multiangle TIRF model. (A) Schema of the system designed to create a slope of fluorescent beads. (B) Overlay of the maximum intensity projection of image stack acquired with WF and TIRF illumination. (Scale bar: 5 μm.) The evolution of the intensity versus the illumination angle θ of two selected beads are plotted in C with the corre- sponding fitting theoretical model (continuous line) for their estimated depth (respectively 10 and 89 nm). (D) Depth of all of the beads estimated by fitting the theoretical TIRF model (in red) and the depth of the same beads estimated by fitting a Gaussian model in the WF image stack (in green). BIOPHYSICS AND COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY slope of the glass slide recovered (Fig. 2D), the confidence interval deducted from the surement of the different characteristic dim Finally, from the dispersion of the estima average slope (Fig. 2D), we can conclude precision obtained with this approach is h sponding precision given by estimating the l the WF image stack as already mentioned Estimating the 3D density of fluoroph emission point spread function then woul inverting the linear system. Some care h inverting such system, as the inverse proble ditioned. Nevertheless, constraints can be i such as positivity, and, in the case of tim multiframe regularization can be used in add temporal regularization smoothness to so problem. Moreover, to be effective, such requires a correct knowledge of the backgro quence, for each multiangle image stack, obtained by driving the beam out of the several convex constraints have to be satisfie propose to rely on a flavor of the PPXA alg A B C D Fig. 2. Experimental validation of the multiangle TIRF model. (A) Schema of the system designed to create a slope of fluorescent beads. (B) Overlay of the maximum intensity projection of image stack acquired with WF and ✓(t) y(t) light depth x cell y(t) = m(t) ✓(t) ! multiple angles ✓(t).

Slide 79

Slide 79 text

Laplace Transform Inversion ( m ) def. = Z ' ( x, ·)d m ( x ) ' ( x, t ) = e xt Laplace transform: ' ( x, ·) x = 2 x = 20 Total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy (TIRFM) t (m1) (m2) x m1 t m2 x [with E. Soubies] [Boulanger et al. 2014] varying the azimuth φ during the exposure time and can be modeled by the following expression: gðθÞ = Z2π 0 Z∞ 0 Z∞ −∞ Iðz; α; φÞρ θ − α Ω=cos θ f À z Á dαdzdφ; where fðzÞ is the density of fluorophores in the medium con- volved by the emission point spread function and ρð · Þ represents the laser beam profile of divergence Ω. The function Iðz; α; φÞ slope of the glass slide recovered (Fig. 2D), the latter falling within the confidence interval deducted from the accuracy of the mea- surement of the different characteristic dimensions of the sample. Finally, from the dispersion of the estimated depth around the average slope (Fig. 2D), we can conclude that the localization precision obtained with this approach is higher than the corre- sponding precision given by estimating the location of the beads in the WF image stack as already mentioned (17). Estimating the 3D density of fluorophores convolved by the emission point spread function then would simply boil down to inverting the linear system. Some care has to be taken when inverting such system, as the inverse problem is at best badly con- ditioned. Nevertheless, constraints can be imposed to the solution such as positivity, and, in the case of time-lapse acquisitions, a multiframe regularization can be used in addition to the spatial and temporal regularization smoothness to solve the reconstruction problem. Moreover, to be effective, such a positivity constraint requires a correct knowledge of the background level. As a conse- quence, for each multiangle image stack, a background image is obtained by driving the beam out of the objective. Given that several convex constraints have to be satisfied at the same time, we propose to rely on a flavor of the PPXA algorithm (26) to estimate the tridimensional density of fluorophores (Fig. S4). More detailed information on how noise, object depth, and the required number of angles can be taken into account is discussed in SI Imaging Model and Reconstruction and Fig. S5. Finally, to take into account the variations of the medium index, we select an effective index within a predefined range by minimizing the reconstruction error at each pixel under a spatial smoothness constraint (Fig. S6). It is worth noting that the computation time for the reconstruction on 10 planes from a stack 512 × 512 images corresponding to 21 in- cidence angles ranges from 1 to 5 min depending on the number of iterations. Imaging in Vitro and in Vivo Actin Assembly. The proposed multi- angle TIRF image reconstruction approach was then tested on complex samples such as actin network architectures for which spatial resolution and dynamics remain an issue. We first chal- lenged the spatial organization of actin nucleation geometry using an in vitro assay based on micropatterning method (27). A B C D Fig. 2. Experimental validation of the multiangle TIRF model. (A) Schema of the system designed to create a slope of fluorescent beads. (B) Overlay of the maximum intensity projection of image stack acquired with WF and TIRF illumination. (Scale bar: 5 μm.) The evolution of the intensity versus the illumination angle θ of two selected beads are plotted in C with the corre- sponding fitting theoretical model (continuous line) for their estimated depth (respectively 10 and 89 nm). (D) Depth of all of the beads estimated by fitting the theoretical TIRF model (in red) and the depth of the same beads estimated by fitting a Gaussian model in the WF image stack (in green). BIOPHYSICS AND COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY slope of the glass slide recovered (Fig. 2D), the confidence interval deducted from the surement of the different characteristic dim Finally, from the dispersion of the estima average slope (Fig. 2D), we can conclude precision obtained with this approach is h sponding precision given by estimating the l the WF image stack as already mentioned Estimating the 3D density of fluoroph emission point spread function then woul inverting the linear system. Some care h inverting such system, as the inverse proble ditioned. Nevertheless, constraints can be i such as positivity, and, in the case of tim multiframe regularization can be used in add temporal regularization smoothness to so problem. Moreover, to be effective, such requires a correct knowledge of the backgro quence, for each multiangle image stack, obtained by driving the beam out of the several convex constraints have to be satisfie propose to rely on a flavor of the PPXA alg A B C D Fig. 2. Experimental validation of the multiangle TIRF model. (A) Schema of the system designed to create a slope of fluorescent beads. (B) Overlay of the maximum intensity projection of image stack acquired with WF and ✓(t) y(t) light depth x cell y(t) = m(t) ✓(t) ! multiple angles ✓(t). N = 1 N = 2 N = 3 ⌘W ⌘W ⌘W ¯ x = 2 ¯ x = 20 Non-translation-invariant operator ¯ x x1 x2 ! ⌘W depends on ¯ x!

Slide 80

Slide 80 text

Laplace Transform Inversion ( m ) def. = Z ' ( x, ·)d m ( x ) ' ( x, t ) = e xt Laplace transform: ' ( x, ·) x = 2 x = 20 Total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy (TIRFM) t (m1) (m2) x m1 t m2 x [with E. Soubies] [Boulanger et al. 2014] varying the azimuth φ during the exposure time and can be modeled by the following expression: gðθÞ = Z2π 0 Z∞ 0 Z∞ −∞ Iðz; α; φÞρ θ − α Ω=cos θ f À z Á dαdzdφ; where fðzÞ is the density of fluorophores in the medium con- volved by the emission point spread function and ρð · Þ represents the laser beam profile of divergence Ω. The function Iðz; α; φÞ slope of the glass slide recovered (Fig. 2D), the latter falling within the confidence interval deducted from the accuracy of the mea- surement of the different characteristic dimensions of the sample. Finally, from the dispersion of the estimated depth around the average slope (Fig. 2D), we can conclude that the localization precision obtained with this approach is higher than the corre- sponding precision given by estimating the location of the beads in the WF image stack as already mentioned (17). Estimating the 3D density of fluorophores convolved by the emission point spread function then would simply boil down to inverting the linear system. Some care has to be taken when inverting such system, as the inverse problem is at best badly con- ditioned. Nevertheless, constraints can be imposed to the solution such as positivity, and, in the case of time-lapse acquisitions, a multiframe regularization can be used in addition to the spatial and temporal regularization smoothness to solve the reconstruction problem. Moreover, to be effective, such a positivity constraint requires a correct knowledge of the background level. As a conse- quence, for each multiangle image stack, a background image is obtained by driving the beam out of the objective. Given that several convex constraints have to be satisfied at the same time, we propose to rely on a flavor of the PPXA algorithm (26) to estimate the tridimensional density of fluorophores (Fig. S4). More detailed information on how noise, object depth, and the required number of angles can be taken into account is discussed in SI Imaging Model and Reconstruction and Fig. S5. Finally, to take into account the variations of the medium index, we select an effective index within a predefined range by minimizing the reconstruction error at each pixel under a spatial smoothness constraint (Fig. S6). It is worth noting that the computation time for the reconstruction on 10 planes from a stack 512 × 512 images corresponding to 21 in- cidence angles ranges from 1 to 5 min depending on the number of iterations. Imaging in Vitro and in Vivo Actin Assembly. The proposed multi- angle TIRF image reconstruction approach was then tested on complex samples such as actin network architectures for which spatial resolution and dynamics remain an issue. We first chal- lenged the spatial organization of actin nucleation geometry using an in vitro assay based on micropatterning method (27). A B C D Fig. 2. Experimental validation of the multiangle TIRF model. (A) Schema of the system designed to create a slope of fluorescent beads. (B) Overlay of the maximum intensity projection of image stack acquired with WF and TIRF illumination. (Scale bar: 5 μm.) The evolution of the intensity versus the illumination angle θ of two selected beads are plotted in C with the corre- sponding fitting theoretical model (continuous line) for their estimated depth (respectively 10 and 89 nm). (D) Depth of all of the beads estimated by fitting the theoretical TIRF model (in red) and the depth of the same beads estimated by fitting a Gaussian model in the WF image stack (in green). BIOPHYSICS AND COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY slope of the glass slide recovered (Fig. 2D), the confidence interval deducted from the surement of the different characteristic dim Finally, from the dispersion of the estima average slope (Fig. 2D), we can conclude precision obtained with this approach is h sponding precision given by estimating the l the WF image stack as already mentioned Estimating the 3D density of fluoroph emission point spread function then woul inverting the linear system. Some care h inverting such system, as the inverse proble ditioned. Nevertheless, constraints can be i such as positivity, and, in the case of tim multiframe regularization can be used in add temporal regularization smoothness to so problem. Moreover, to be effective, such requires a correct knowledge of the backgro quence, for each multiangle image stack, obtained by driving the beam out of the several convex constraints have to be satisfie propose to rely on a flavor of the PPXA alg A B C D Fig. 2. Experimental validation of the multiangle TIRF model. (A) Schema of the system designed to create a slope of fluorescent beads. (B) Overlay of the maximum intensity projection of image stack acquired with WF and ✓(t) y(t) light depth x cell y(t) = m(t) ✓(t) ! multiple angles ✓(t). N = 1 N = 2 N = 3 ⌘W ⌘W ⌘W ¯ x = 2 ¯ x = 20 Non-translation-invariant operator ¯ x x1 x2 ! ⌘W depends on ¯ x! Proposition: In particular, ⌘W is non-degenerate. ⌘W ( x ) = 1 ✓ x ¯ x x + ¯ x ◆2N

Slide 81

Slide 81 text

Deconvolution of measures: ! L2 errors are not well-suited. Weak-* convergence. Optimal transport distance. Exact support estimation. ... Conclusion

Slide 82

Slide 82 text

Deconvolution of measures: ! L2 errors are not well-suited. Weak-* convergence. Optimal transport distance. Exact support estimation. ... Conclusion Low-noise behavior: ! dictated by ⌘0. ! checkable via ⌘V . ! asymptotic via ⌘W .

Slide 83

Slide 83 text

Lasso on discrete grids: Deconvolution of measures: ! L2 errors are not well-suited. Weak-* convergence. Optimal transport distance. Exact support estimation. ... similar ⌘0-analysis applies. ! Relate discrete and continuous recoveries. Conclusion Low-noise behavior: ! dictated by ⌘0. ! checkable via ⌘V . ! asymptotic via ⌘W .

Slide 84

Slide 84 text

Lasso on discrete grids: Deconvolution of measures: ! L2 errors are not well-suited. Weak-* convergence. Optimal transport distance. Exact support estimation. ... similar ⌘0-analysis applies. ! Relate discrete and continuous recoveries. Open problem: other regularizations (e.g. piecewise constant) ? Conclusion Low-noise behavior: ! dictated by ⌘0. ! checkable via ⌘V . ! asymptotic via ⌘W . see [Chambolle, Duval, Peyr´ e, Poon 2016] for TV denoising.