|
|
|
|
|
by mjb
5262 days ago
|
|
Spare transforms like this are very interesting, and these seem like some very good performance results. It's worth noting, though, that FFTW (http://www.fftw.org/) is still much faster on the sizes of transforms that many (most?) applications do - less than 2^15 or so entries. Also, as the number of non-zero frequencies climbs, sparse algorithms very quickly get overtaken by good implementations of more standard FFT algorithms. Still, very cool stuff. |
|
I don't know how to estimate what values of n would be relevant for today's applications, but n=2^22≈4M doesn't seem like such a big number for images or video (if signal length roughly corresponds to number of pixels). Any thoughts?