skip to main content
research-article

An FPGA-Based Architecture for High-Speed Compressed Signal Reconstruction

Published:26 May 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Compressive Sensing (CS) is an emerging research area that allows efficient signal acquisition under the sub-Nyquist rate while still promising reliable data recovery. However, practical applications of CS in hardware platforms are limited as signal reconstruction is still challenging due to its high computational complexity, especially for autonomous real-time signal recovery. In this article, we propose an algorithmic transformation technique referred to as Matrix Inversion Bypass (MIB) to improve the signal recovery efficiency of the Orthogonal Matching Pursuit (OMP)-based CS reconstruction. The basic idea of MIB is to decouple the computations of intermediate signal estimates and matrix inversions, thereby enabling parallel processing of these two time-consuming operations in the OMP algorithm. The proposed MIB naturally leads to a parallel architecture for high-speed dedicated hardware implementations. An FPGA-based implementation is developed with the optimized structure aimed at the efficient utilization of hardware resources while realizing high-speed signal recovery. The proposed architecture can perform the signal recovery at up to 1.4 × faster than the OMP-based implementation using almost the same hardware resources.

References

  1. Nasir Ahmed, T. Natarajan, and Kamisetty Rao. 1974. Discrete cosine transform. IEEE Trans. Comput. C-23, 1 (Jan. 1974), 90--93. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Lin Bai, Patrick Maechler, Michael Muehlberghuber, and Hubert Kaeslin. 2012. High-speed compressed sensing reconstruction on FPGA using OMP and AMP. In Proceedings of 2012 19th IEEE International Conference on Electronics, Circuits and Systems, 53--56.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Waheed Bajwa, Jarvis Haupt, Akbar Sayeed, and Robert Nowak. 2012. Compressed channel sensing: A new approach to estimating sparse multipath channels. Proc. IEEE 98, 6 (June 2010), 1058--1076.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Dror Baron, Marco Duarte, Michael Wakin, Shriram Sarvotham, and Richard Baraniuk. 2009. Distributed compressive sensing. arXiv preprint arXiv:0901.3403 (Jan. 2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Christian Berger, Zhaohui Wang, Jianzhong Huang, and Shengli Zhou. 2010. Application of compressive sensing to sparse channel estimation. IEEE Commun. Mag. 48, 11 (Nov. 2010), 164--174. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Ake Björck. 1996. Numerical Methods for Least Squares Problems. SIAM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Emmanuel J. Candès. 2006. Compressive sampling. In Proc. Int. Congr. Math. 3, 12 (Aug. 2006), 1433--1452.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Emmanuel Candès and Terence Tao. 2005. Decoding by linear programming. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 51, 12 (Dec. 2005), 4203--4215. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Emmanuel Candès and Michael Wakin. 2008. An introduction to compressive sampling. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 25, 2 (Mar. 2008), 21--30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Krishnendu Chakrabarty, Sitharama Iyengar, Hairong Qi, and Eungchun Cho. 2002. Grid coverage for surveillance and target location in distributed sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Comput 51, 12 (Dec. 2002), 1448--1453. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Scott Chen, David Donoho, and Michael Saunders. 2001. Atomic decomposition by basis pursuit. SIAM Rev. 43, 1 (Mar. 2001), 129--159. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Wei Dai and Olgica Milenkovic. 2009. Subspace pursuit for compressive sensing signal reconstruction. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 55, 5 (May 2009), 1094--1121. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. David Donoho. 2006. Compressed sensing. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 52, 4 (Apr. 2006), 1289--1306. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. David Donoho, Yaakov Tsaig, Iddo Drori, and Jean-Luc Starck. 2012. Sparse solution of underdetermined systems of linear equations by stagewise orthogonal matching pursuit. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 58, 2 (Feb. 2012), 1094--1121. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Marco Duarte, Mark Davenport, Dharmpal Takhar, Jason Laska, Ting Sun, Kevin Kelly, and Richard Baraniuk. 2008. Single-pixel imaging via compressive sampling. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 25, 2 (Mar. 2008), 83--91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Li Feng, Robert Grimm, Kai Block, Hersh Chandarana, Sungheon Kim, Jian Xu, L. Axel, D. K. Sodickson, and R. Otazo. 2014. Golden-angle radial sparse parallel MRI: Combination of compressed sensing, parallel imaging, and golden-angle radial sampling for fast and flexible dynamic volumetric MRI. Magn. Reson. Med. 72, 3 (Sep. 2014), 707--717.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Mário Figueiredo, Robert Nowak, and Stephen Wright. 2007. Gradient projection for sparse reconstruction: Application to compressed sensing and other inverse problems. IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process. 1, 4 (Dec. 2007), 586--597.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Gene Golub and Charles Van Loan. 1983. Matrix Computations. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Justin Haldar, Diego Hernando, and Zhi-Pei Liang. 2011. Compressed-sensing MRI with random encoding. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 30, 4 (Apr. 2011), 893--903.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Sitharama Iyengar and Richard Brooks (Eds.). 2005. Distributed sensor networks. CRC Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Stefan Kunis and Holger Rauhut. 2008. Random sampling of sparse trigonometric polynomials, II. Orthogonal matching pursuit versus basis pursuit. J. Found. Comput. Math. 8, 6 (Dec. 2008), 737--763. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Yun-Yueh Lee, Ching-Hung Wang, and Yuan-Hao Huang. 2015. A hybrid RF/baseband precoding processor based on parallel-index-selection matrix-inversion-bypass simultaneous orthogonal matching pursuit for millimeter wave MIMO systems. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 63, 2 (Jan. 2015), 305--317.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Hossein Mamaghanian, Nadia Khaled, David Atienza, and Pierre Vandergheynst. 2012. Design and exploration of low-power analog to information conversion based on compressed sensing. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Sel. Topics Circuits Syst. 2, 3 (Sep. 2012), 493--501.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Guoxian Huang and Lei Wang. 2012. High-speed signal reconstruction with orthogonal matching pursuit via matrix inversion bypass. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Workshop on Signal Processing Systems (SiPS’12), 191--196. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Oleg Maslennikow, Volodymyr Lepekha, Anatoli Sergiyenko, Adam Tomas, and Roman Wyrzykowski. 2008. Parallel implementation of Cholesky LLT-algorithm in FPGA-based processor. Parallel Process. Appl. Math. 4967 (2008), 137--147. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Mark Murphy, Marcus Alley, James Demmel, Kurt Keutzer, Shreyas Vasanawala, and Michael Lustig. 2012. Fast ℓ1-SPIRiT compressed sensing parallel imaging MRI: Scalable parallel implementation and clinically feasible runtime. IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 31, 6 (June 2012), 1250--1262.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Balas Natarajan. 1995. Sparse approximate solutions to linear systems. SIAM J. Comput. 24, 2 (Apr. 1995), 227--234. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Deanna Needell and Roman Vershynin. 2009. Uniform uncertainty principle and signal recovery via regularized orthogonal matching pursuit. Found. Comput. Math. 9, 3 (Apr. 2009), 317--334. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Kangyu Ni, Prasun Mahanti, Somantika Datta, Svetlana Roudenko, and Douglas Cochran. 2009. Image reconstruction by deterministic compressed sensing with chirp matrices. Proc. SPIE 7497 (Oct. 2009), 74971S--74971S.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Yusuke Oike and Abbas Gamal. 2013. CMOS image sensor with per-column ΣΔ ADC and programmable compressed sensing. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits 48, 1 (Jan. 2013), 318--328.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Hassan Rabah, Abbes Amira, Basant Kumar Mohanty, Somaya Almaadeed, and Pramod Kumar Meher. 2015. FPGA implementation of orthogonal matching pursuit for compressive sensing reconstruction. in IEEE Trans. Very Large Scale Integr. (VLSI) Syst. (Oct. 2015), 2209--2220.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Fengbo Ren, Richard Dorrace, Wenyao Xu, and Dejan Markovió. 2013. A single-precision compressive sensing signal reconstruction engine on FPGAs. In Proceedings of the 2013 23rd International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications. 1--4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Ryan Robucci, Jordan Gray, Leung Chiu, Justin Romberg, and Paul Hasler. 2010. Compressive sensing on a CMOS separable-transform image sensor. Proc. IEEE 98, 6 (June 2010), 1089--1101.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Ron Rubinstein, Michael Zibulevsky, and Michael Elad. 2008. Effiecient implementation of the K-SVD algorithm using batch orthogonal matching pursuit. CS Technion 40, 8 (Apr. 2008), 1--15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Avi Septimus and Raphael Steinberg. 2010. Compressive sampling hardware reconstruction. In Proceedings of 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems. 3316--3319.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. John Slavinsky, Jason Laska, Mark Davenport, and Richard Baraniuk. 2011. The compressive multiplexer for multi-channel compressive sensing. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech, Signal Process. 31, 6 (May 2011), 3980--3983.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Jerome Stanislaus and Tinoosh Mohsenim. 2012. High performance compressive sensing reconstruction hardware with QRD process. In Proceedings of 2012 International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, 29--32.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Bob Sturm and Mads Christensen. 2015. Comparison of orthogonal matching pursuit implementations. In Proceedings of EUSIPCO. 220--224.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Joel Tropp and Anna Gilbert. 2007. Signal recovery from random measurements via orthogonal matching pursuit. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 53, 12 (Dec. 2007), 4655--4666. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Joel Tropp, Jason Laska, Marco Duarte, Justin Romberg, and Richard Baraniuk. 2010. Beyond Nyquist: Efficient sampling of sparse bandlimited signals. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 56, 1 (Jan. 2010), 520--544. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. An FPGA-Based Architecture for High-Speed Compressed Signal Reconstruction

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!