On uniqueness of the nTH order tensor decomposition into rank-1 terms with linear independence in one mode

SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 2498-2516

  Stegeman, Alwin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Candecomp; Parafac; Tensor decomposition; Uniqueness

Indexed keywords

CANDECOMP; KRUSKAL; LINEAR INDEPENDENCE; MATRIX; OUTER PRODUCT; PARAFAC; TENSOR DECOMPOSITION; UNIQUENESS;

TENSORS;

EID: 79251507624     PISSN: 08954798     EISSN: 10957162     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1137/090779632     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. E. Acar and B. Yener, Unsupervised multiway data analysis: A literature survey, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., 21 (2009), pp. 6-20.
2. A. H. Andersen and W. S. Rayens, Structure-seeking multilinear methods for the analysis of fMRI data, NeuroImage, 22 (2004), pp. 728-739.
3. J. D. Carroll and J. J. Chang, An analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an n-way generalization of Eckart-Young decomposition, Psychometrika, 35 (1970), pp. 283-319.
4. P. Comon, Independent component analysis, a new concept?, Signal Process., 36 (1994), pp. 287-314.
5. L. De Lathauwer, B. De Moor, and J. Vandewalle, An introduction to independent component analysis, J. Chemometrics, 14 (2000), pp. 123-149.
6. L. De Lathauwer, A link between the canonical decomposition in multilinear algebra and simultaneous matrix diagonalization, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 28 (2006), pp. 642-666.
7. L. De Lathauwer and J. Castaing, Tensor-based techniques for the blind separation of DSCDMA signals, Signal Process., 87 (2007), pp. 322-336.
8. L. De Lathauwer, J. Castaing, and J.-F. Cardoso, Fourth-order cumulant-based blind identification of underdetermined mixtures, IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 55 (2007), pp. 2965-2973.
9. V. De Silva and L.-H. Lim, Tensor rank and the ill-posedness of the best low-rank approximation problem, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 30 (2008), pp. 1084-1127.
10. S. R. Durrell, C. H. Lee, R. T. Ross, and E. L. Gross, Factor analysis of the nearultraviolet absorption spectrum of plastocyanin using bilinear, trilinear, and quadrilinear models, Arch. Biochem. Biophys., 278 (1990), pp. 148-160.
11. R. A. Harshman, Foundations of the PARAFAC procedure: Models and conditions for an "explanatory" multimodal factor analysis, UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 16 (1970), pp. 1-84.
12. F. L. Hitchcock, The expression of a tensor or a polyadic as a sum of products, J. Math. Phys., 6 (1927), pp. 164-189.
13. F. L. Hitchcock, Multiple invariants and generalized rank of a p-way matrix or tensor, J. Math. Phys., 7 (1927), pp. 39-79.
14. A. Hyvärinen, J. Karhunen, and E. Oja, Independent Component Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2001.
15. T. Jiang and N. D. Sidiropoulos, Kruskal's permutation lemma and the identification of Candecomp/Parafac and bilinear models with constant modulus constraints, IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 52 (2004), pp. 2625-2636.
16. A. Karfoul, L. Albera, and L. De Lathauwer, Canonical decomposition of even higher order cumulant arrays for blind underdetermined mixture identification, in Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE Sensor Array and Multichannel Signal Processing Workshop (IEEE SAM 2008), Darmstadt, Germany, 2008, pp. 501-505.
17. H. A. L. Kiers and I. Van Mechelen, Three-way component analysis: Principles and illustrative application, Psychological Methods, 6 (2001), pp. 84-110.
18. T. G. Kolda and B. W. Bader, Tensor decompositions and applications, SIAM Rev., 51 (2009), pp. 455-500.
19. W. P. Krijnen, T. K. Dijkstra, and A. Stegeman, On the non-existence of optimal solutions and the occurrence of "degeneracy" in the Candecomp/Parafac model, Psychometrika, 73 (2008), pp. 431-439.
20. P. M. Kroonenberg, Applied multiway data analysis, Wiley Ser. Probab. Stat., John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2008.
21. J. B. Kruskal, Three-way arrays: Rank and uniqueness of trilinear decompositions, with applications to arithmetic complexity and statistics, Linear Algebra Appl., 18 (1977), pp. 95-138.
22. J. B. Kruskal, R. A. Harshman, and M. E. Lundy, How 3-MFA data can cause degenerate Parafac solutions, among other relationships, in Multiway Data Analysis, R. Coppi and S. Bolasco, eds., North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1989, pp. 115-122.
23. X. Liu and N. D. Sidiropoulos, Cramér-Rao lower bounds for low-rank decomposition of multidimensional arrays, IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 49 (2001), pp. 2074-2086.
24. M. Mørup, L. K. Hansen, C. S. Herrmann, J. Parnas, and S. M. Arnfred, Parallel factor analysis as an exploratory tool for wavelet transformed event-related EEG, NeuroImage, 29 (2006), pp. 938-947.
25. R. Rocci and P. Giordani, A weak degeneracy revealing decomposition for the Candecomp/Parafac model, J. Chemometrics, 24 (2010), pp. 57-66.
26. N. D. Sidiropoulos and R. Bro, On the uniqueness of multilinear decomposition of N-way arrays, J. Chemometrics, 14 (2000), pp. 229-239.
27. N. D. Sidiropoulos, G. Giannakis, and R. Bro, Blind Parafac receivers for DS-CDMA systems, IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 48 (2000), pp. 810-823.
28. N. D. Sidiropoulos, R. Bro, and G. B. Giannakis, Parallel factor analysis in sensor array processing, IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 48 (2000), pp. 2377-2388.
29. A. Smilde, R. Bro, and P. Geladi, Multi-way Analysis. Applications in the Chemical Sciences, Wiley, Chichester, 2004.
30. A. Stegeman, Degeneracy in Candecomp/Parafac explained for p×p×2 arrays of rank p+1 or higher, Psychometrika, 71 (2006), pp. 483-501.
31. A. Stegeman, Degeneracy in Candecomp/Parafac and Indscal explained for several three-sliced arrays with a two-valued typical rank, Psychometrika, 72 (2007), pp. 601-619.
32. A. Stegeman, Low-rank approximation of generic p × q × 2 arrays and diverging components in the Candecomp/Parafac model, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 30 (2008), pp. 988-1007.
33. A. Stegeman, Using the simultaneous generalized Schur decomposition as a Candecomp/Parafac algorithm for ill-conditioned data, J. Chemometrics, 23 (2009), pp. 385-392.
34. A. Stegeman, On uniqueness conditions for Candecomp/Parafac and Indscal with full column rank in one mode, Linear Algebra Appl., 431 (2009), pp. 211-227.
35. A. Stegeman, J. M. F. Ten Berge, and L. De Lathauwer, Sufficient conditions for uniqueness in Candecomp/Parafac and Indscal with random component matrices, Psychometrika, 71 (2006), pp. 219-229.
36. A. Stegeman and N. D. Sidiropoulos, On Kruskal's uniqueness condition for the Candecomp/Parafac decomposition, Linear Algebra Appl., 420 (2007), pp. 540-552.
37. A. Stegeman and L. De Lathauwer, A method to avoid diverging components in the Candecomp/Parafac model for generic I ×J ×2 arrays, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 30 (2008), pp. 1614-1638.
38. G. Tomasi and R. Bro, A comparison of algorithms for fitting the PARAFAC model, Comput. Statist. Data Anal., 50 (2006), pp. 1700-1734.