arXiv reader

Non-uniqueness theory in sampled STFT phase retrieval

Philipp Grohs and Lukas Liehr

arXiv
2207.05628v2 · PDF · 27 September 2023
Categories
math.FA
Journal
SIAM J. Math. Anal. Vol. 55, No. 5 (2023), pp. 4695-4726
DOI
10.1137/22M1510224
Licence
CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

The reconstruction of a function from its spectrogram (i.e., the absolute value of its short-time Fourier transform (STFT)) arises as a key problem in several important applications, including coherent diffraction imaging and audio processing. It is a classical result that for suitable windows any function can, in principle, be uniquely recovered up to a global phase factor from its spectrogram. However, for most practical applications only discrete samples - typically from a lattice - of the spectrogram are available. This raises the question of whether lattice samples of the spectrogram contain sufficient information for determining a function f\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^d) up to a global phase factor. In the present paper, we answer this question in the negative by providing general non-identifiability results which lead to a non-uniqueness theory for the sampled STFT phase retrieval problem. Precisely, given any dimension d, any window function g and any (symplectic or separable) lattice \mathcal{L} \subseteq \mathbb{R}^d, we construct pairs of functions f,h\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^d) that do not agree up to a global phase factor, but whose spectrograms agree on \mathcal{L}. Our techniques are sufficiently flexible to produce counterexamples to unique recoverability under even more stringent assumptions; for example, if the window function is real-valued, the functions f,h can even be chosen to satisfy |f|=|h|. Our results thus reveal the non-existence of a critical sampling density in the absence of phase information, a property which is in stark contrast to uniqueness results in time-frequency analysis.

Items 57

Theorem

Theorem 1.1

6CYA

Suppose that \mathcal{L} \subseteq {\mathbb R}^{2d} satisfies one of the following two conditions:

  1. \mathcal{L} = S({\mathbb R}^d \times \Lambda) = \{ S(x,\lambda) : x \in {\mathbb R}^d, \lambda \in \Lambda \} with S\in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) a symplectic matrix and \Lambda \subseteq {\mathbb R}^d an arbitrary lattice.

  2. \mathcal{L} = L{\mathbb Z}^{2d} is a lattice generated by L \in \mathrm{GL}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) which satisfies the factorization property L=ST with S\in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) symplectic and T a block-diagonal matrix of the form

    T = \begin{pmatrix} A & 0 \\ 0 & B \end{pmatrix}, \ \ A,B \in \mathrm{GL}_d({\mathbb R}).

Then for every window function g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} there exist two functions f_1,f_2 \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} such that

|V_g(f_1)(z)| = |V_g(f_2)(z)| \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L} \ \ \text{and} \ \ f_1 \nsim f_2.
Corollary

Corollary 1.2

8HO8

Suppose that \mathcal{L} \subseteq {\mathbb R}^{2d} is a lattice which satisfies one of the following four conditions:

  1. \mathcal{L} is symplectic, i.e., \mathcal{L}=\alpha S {\mathbb Z}^{2d} for some \alpha>0 and some S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}).

  2. \mathcal{L} is rectangular, i.e., its generating matrix is diagonal.

  3. \mathcal{L} is separable, i.e., \mathcal{L} = \mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B} with \mathcal{A},\mathcal{B} lattices in {{\mathbb R}^d}.

  4. \mathcal{L}=\alpha {\mathbb Z}^d \times \beta {\mathbb Z}^d for some \alpha,\beta \in {\mathbb R} \setminus \{ 0 \}.

Then for every window function g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} there exists two functions f_1,f_2 \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} such that

|V_g(f_1)(z)| = |V_g(f_2)(z)| \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L} \ \ \text{and} \ \ f_1 \nsim f_2.
Theorem

Theorem 1.3

L0KH

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be an arbitrary window function. If \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}} satisfies \mathcal{L} \subseteq S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \Lambda) for some symplectic matrix S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) and some lattice \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} then \mathcal{N}(g,\mathcal{L}) contains an infinite-dimensional cone.

Theorem

Theorem 1.4

M25F

Let g \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) be a real-valued window function, and let \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}} be a separable lattice. Then there exist functions f_1,f_2 \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} which satisfy all of the following three properties:

  1. |V_g(f_1)(z)|=|V_g(f_2)(z)| for all z \in \mathcal{L}

  2. |f_1(t)| = |f_2(t)| for all t \in {{\mathbb R}^d}

  3. f_1 \nsim f_2.

Theorem

Theorem 1.5

O17W

Let g \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) be a real-valued window function, and suppose that \mathcal{L} \subseteq {\mathbb R}^{2d} satisfies one of the following two conditions:

  1. \mathcal{L} = \Lambda \times {\mathbb R}^d with \Lambda a lattice in {{\mathbb R}^d}.

  2. \mathcal{L} is a separable lattice.

Then there exist two real-valued functions f_1,f_2 \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) such that

|V_g(f_1)(z)| = |V_g(f_2)(z)| \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L} \ \ \text{and} \ \ f_1 \nsim f_2.
Corollary

Corollary 1.6

GSF3

Suppose that \mathcal{L} = L{\mathbb Z}^{2d} \subseteq {\mathbb R}^{2d} is a lattice which has the property that the generating matrix L has rational entries, L \in \mathrm{GL}_{2d}({\mathbb Q}). Then for every real-valued window function g \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) there exists two real-valued functions f_1,f_2 \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) such that

|V_g(f_1)(z)| = |V_g(f_2)(z)| \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L} \ \ \text{and} \ \ f_1 \nsim f_2.
Theorem

Theorem 1.7

GLB7

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be an arbitrary real-valued window function. If \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}} satisfies \mathcal{L} \subseteq \Lambda \times {{\mathbb R}^d} for some lattice \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} then \mathcal{N}_{\mathbb R}(g,\mathcal{L}) contains an infinite-dimensional cone.

Lemma

Lemma 2.1

UWHG

Let \tau,\nu \in {{\mathbb R}^d} and let f,g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}. Then the short-time Fourier transform has the following properties:

  1. The map V_gf : {{\mathbb R}^{2d}} \to {\mathbb C} is uniformly continuous.

  2. The STFT satisfies the covariance property which reads

    V_g(T_\tau M_\nu f)(x,\omega) = e^{-2\pi i \tau \cdot \omega} V_gf(x-\tau,\omega-\nu).
  3. The L^2({{\mathbb R}^{2d}})-norm of V_gf is given by

    \| V_gf\|_{L^2({{\mathbb R}^{2d}})} = \| f \|_{{L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}} \| g \|_{{L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}}.

    In particular, V_g : {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} \to L^2({{\mathbb R}^{2d}}) is a bounded linear operator.

Moreover, the operators {\mathcal{F}}, T_\tau,M_\nu and \mathcal{R} obey the relations

  1. (4) \overline{{\mathcal{F}} f} = \mathcal{R}{\mathcal{F}} \overline{f}.

  2. (5) {\mathcal{F}} \mathcal{R} = \mathcal{R} {\mathcal{F}}.

  3. (6) {\mathcal{F}} T_\tau = M_{-\tau} {\mathcal{F}}.

  4. (7) \mathcal{R} T_\tau = T_{-\tau} \mathcal{R}.

Definition

Definition 2.2

7ROG

A matrix S \in \mathrm{GL}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) is called symplectic if

S^T \mathcal{J} S = \mathcal{J}.

The set of all symplectic matrices is called the (real) symplectic group and is denoted by \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}).

Lemma

Lemma 2.3

TGEA

Let S \in \mathrm{GL}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) be an invertible matrix such that

S = \begin{pmatrix} A & B \\ C & D \end{pmatrix}

with A,B,C,D denoting block matrices in {\mathbb R}^{d \times d}. Then S is symplectic if and only if AC^T = A^TC, BD^T=B^TD and A^TD - C^TB = I_d.

Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 2.4

KX65

For A \in \mathrm{GL}_d({\mathbb R}) define the block-diagonal matrix S_A via

S_A = \begin{pmatrix} A & 0 \\ 0 & A^{-T} \end{pmatrix}

where A^{-T} = (A^T)^{-1}. Then the metaplectic operator \mu(S_A) corresponding to S_A is given by

(\mu(S_A)f)(x) = |\det A |^{-1/2} f(A^{-1}x), \ \ f \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}.
Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 2.5

5EXX

Let f,g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} and let S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) be a symplectic matrix. Then for every (x,\omega) \in {\mathbb R}^{2d} we have

V_gf(S(x,\omega)) = e^{\pi i (x \cdot \omega - x' \cdot \omega')} V_{\mu(S)^{-1}g}(\mu(S)^{-1}f)(x,\omega)

where (x',\omega') = S(x,\omega) is the image of (x,\omega) under S.

Used by Proof
Definition

Definition 2.6

6ID7

Let \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice, let S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) be a symplectic matrix, and let \phi \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be a generating function. The S-shift of \phi by \lambda \in \Lambda is defined by

T_\lambda^S \phi \coloneqq \mu(S)T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi.

Further, we call the space

\mathcal{V}_\Lambda^S(\phi) \coloneqq \overline{{\mathrm{span} \,}\{ T_\lambda^S \phi : \lambda \in \Lambda \}}

the shift-invariant space generated by \phi, associated to the S-shift, and subjected to the lattice \Lambda (for short, (S,\Lambda)-shift invariant space).

Proposition

Proposition 2.7

JNQ8

Let \phi \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} and let \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice. If \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\phi] \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*)) then \{ T_\lambda \phi : \lambda \in \Lambda \} is a Bessel sequence, and the series

\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda T_\lambda \phi

converges unconditionally for every \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda).

Used by Proof, Proof, Proof
Proof of Proposition 2.7

The proof is similar to the one presented in [christensenBook, Theorem 9.2.5]. For the convenience of the reader we include a proof of the statement in the Appendix ?.

Corollary

Corollary 2.8

AB21

Let \phi \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}, let \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice, and let S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) be a symplectic matrix. If \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\mu(S)^{-1}\phi] \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*)) then \{ T_\lambda^S \phi : \lambda \in \Lambda \} is a Bessel sequence, and the series \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda T_\lambda^S \phi converges unconditionally for every \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda).

Used by Proof, Proof, Proof
Proof of Corollary 2.8

Proposition 2.7 implies that under the conditions stated above, the system \{ T_\lambda \mu(S)^{-1} \phi : \lambda \in \Lambda \} is a Bessel sequence in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}. Since the property of being a Bessel sequence is invariant under the action of a bounded linear operator, it follows that

\{ \mu(S)T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi : \lambda \in \Lambda \} = \{ T_\lambda^S \phi : \lambda \in \Lambda \}

is a Bessel sequence. In particular, \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda T_\lambda^S \phi converges unconditionally for every \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda).

Theorem

Theorem 3.1

UZEN

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be a window function, \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice, and S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) be a symplectic matrix. Suppose that \{ c_\lambda \} \subseteq {\mathbb C} is the defining sequence of f \in \mathcal{V}_\Lambda^S(\mathcal{R}g). Then the following holds:

  1. If \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda) then

    |V_gf(z)| = |V_g(f_\times)(z)| \ \ \forall z \in S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \Lambda^*).
  2. If \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g] \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*)) and \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda) then

    |V_gf(z)| = |V_g(f_\times)(z)| \ \ \forall z \in S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \Lambda^*).
Proof of Theorem 3.1

Proof of (1). Suppose that f = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda T_\lambda^S \mathcal{R}g \in \mathcal{V}_\Lambda^S(\mathcal{R}g) has defining sequence \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda). For (x,\omega) \in {{\mathbb R}^{2d}} we obtain the relations

\begin{aligned} |V_gf(S(x,\omega))| & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{Lemma \ref{lma:interaction_property}}}}{=}} \left | V_{\mu(S)^{-1} g} \left ( \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda T_{\lambda} \mu(S)^{-1} \mathcal{R}g \right ) (x,\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{linearity}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda V_{\mu(S)^{-1} g} (T_\lambda \mu(S)^{-1} \mathcal{R}g) (x,\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{Lemma \ref{lma:stft_properties}(2)}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{-2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} V_{\mu(S)^{-1} g}(\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g)(x-\lambda,\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{-2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} {\mathcal{F}} ( (\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g) ( \overline{T_{x-\lambda} \mu(S)^{-1} g } ) )(\omega) \right |. \end{aligned}

If we replace c_\lambda with \overline{c_\lambda} in equation (Proof), we obtain the identity

\begin{aligned} |V_g(f_\times)(S(x,\omega))| & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} \overline{c_\lambda} e^{-2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} {\mathcal{F}} ( (\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g) ( \overline{T_{x-\lambda} \mu(S)^{-1} g } ) )(\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{Lemma \ref{lma:stft_properties}(4)}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} \mathcal{R} {\mathcal{F}} ( (\overline{\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g}) (T_{x-\lambda} \mu(S)^{-1} g ) )(\omega) \right |. \end{aligned}

We now inspect the operator \mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R} appearing in equation (Proof). Note that Lemma 2.4 shows that for every h \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} we have

(\mu(-I_{2d}) h)(x) = |\det(-I_{2d})|^{-1/2}h(-x) = \mathcal{R}h(x).

Consequently, the metaplectic operator corresponding to the negative of the identity matrix in {\mathbb R}^{2d \times 2d} is the reflection operator \mathcal{R}. Using the properties of the map \mu as given in Section ? and the fact that every S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) commutes with -I_{2d}, it follows that there exists a constant \nu \in \{ 1,-1\} such that

\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R} = \nu \mathcal{R}\mu(S)^{-1}.

In other words, \mu(S)^{-1} and \mathcal{R} commute up to a global phase. Proceeding with equation (Proof) yields

\begin{aligned} |V_g(f_\times)(S(x,\omega))| & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{equation \eqref{R_commuting}}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} \mathcal{R} {\mathcal{F}} ( ( \mathcal{R} \overline{ \mu(S)^{-1} g} ) (T_{x-\lambda} \mu(S)^{-1} g ) )(\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{Lemma \ref{lma:stft_properties}(5)}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} {\mathcal{F}} ( ( \overline{\mu(S)^{-1} g} ) (\mathcal{R} T_{x-\lambda} \mu(S)^{-1} g ) )(\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{Lemma \ref{lma:stft_properties}(7)}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} {\mathcal{F}} ( (\overline{\mu(S)^{-1} g} ) (T_{\lambda-x} \mathcal{R} \mu(S)^{-1} g ) )(\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{equation \eqref{R_commuting}}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} {\mathcal{F}} ( (\overline{\mu(S)^{-1} g} ) (T_{\lambda-x} \mu(S)^{-1} \mathcal{R} g ) )(\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} {\mathcal{F}} ( T_{\lambda-x} [ ( T_{x-\lambda} \overline{\mu(S)^{-1} g}) ( \mu(S)^{-1} \mathcal{R} g ) ] )(\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{Lemma \ref{lma:stft_properties}(6)}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} e^{-2\pi i \omega \cdot (\lambda-x)} {\mathcal{F}} ( ( T_{x-\lambda} \overline{\mu(S)^{-1} g}) ( \mu(S)^{-1} \mathcal{R} g ))(\omega) \right | \\ & \mathrel{\overset{\scriptsize{\eqmakebox[0]{}}}{=}} \left | \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda {\mathcal{F}} ( ( \overline{ T_{x-\lambda} \mu(S)^{-1} g}) ( \mu(S)^{-1} \mathcal{R} g ))(\omega) \right |. \end{aligned}

Now suppose that \omega = \lambda^* \in \Lambda^* is an element of the reciprocal lattice of \Lambda. Then \lambda \cdot \lambda^* \in {\mathbb Z} and therefore the phase factor e^{-2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} appearing in equation (Proof) reduces to

e^{-2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \omega} = e^{-2 \pi i \lambda \cdot \lambda^*} = 1.

Comparing equation (Proof) with equation (Proof) shows that in the case \omega \in \Lambda^* we have |V_gf(S(x,\omega))| = |V_g(f_\times)(S(x,\omega))|. Since x \in {{\mathbb R}^d} was arbitrary, we conclude that the spectrogram of f agrees with the spectrogram of f_\times on the set S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \Lambda^*).

Proof of (2). Now assume that \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g] \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*)). According to Corollary 2.8 the series f = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda T_\lambda^S \mathcal{R}g converges unconditionally to an element in \mathcal{V}_\Lambda^S(\mathcal{R}g) whenever \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda). Since the STFT is a continuous operator on {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}, this implies that the chain of equalities leading to equation (Proof) is justified under the weaker assumption that \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda) since one can interchange summation with the application of the STFT. From this point, the proof of statement (2) follows analogously from the proof of statement (1).

Corollary

Corollary 3.2

T9WH

Let L \in \mathrm{GL}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) be an invertible matrix which factors into L=ST where S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) is a symplectic matrix and T \in \mathrm{GL}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) is a block-diagonal matrix of the form

T = \begin{pmatrix} A & 0 \\ 0 & B \end{pmatrix}, \ \ A,B \in \mathrm{GL}_d({\mathbb R}).

Further, let \mathcal{L}=L{\mathbb Z}^{2d} be the lattice generated by L and let \mathcal{B}=B{\mathbb Z}^d be the lattice generated by B. Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be a window function, and suppose that \{ c_\lambda : \lambda \in \mathcal{B}^* \} \subseteq {\mathbb C} is the defining sequence of f \in \mathcal{V}_{\mathcal{B}^*}^S(\mathcal{R}g). Then the following holds:

  1. If \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\mathcal{B}^*) then

    |V_gf(z)| = |V_g(f_\times)(z)| \ \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L}.
  2. If \mathfrak{p}_\mathcal{B}(\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g) \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{B})) and \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\mathcal{B}^*) then

    |V_gf(z)| = |V_g(f_\times)(z)| \ \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L}.
Used by Proof
Proof of Corollary 3.2

Proof of (1). Suppose that \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\mathcal{B}^*) is the defining sequence of f \in \mathcal{V}_{\mathcal{B}^*}^S(\mathcal{R}g). Since (\mathcal{B}^*)^* = \mathcal{B}, Theorem 3.1(1) and the choice of f implies that

|V_gf(z)| = |V_g(f_\times)(z)| \ \ \forall z \in S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \mathcal{B}).

The statement is therefore a consequence of the inclusion

\mathcal{L}=ST{\mathbb Z}^{2d} = S(A{\mathbb Z}^d \times B{\mathbb Z}^d) \subseteq S({\mathbb R}^d \times B{\mathbb Z}^d) = S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \mathcal{B}).

In view of identity (Proof), the spectrogram of f agrees with the spectrogram of f_\times on the lattice \mathcal{L}.

Proof of (2). To prove the second statement we observe that the condition \mathfrak{p}_\mathcal{B}(\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g) \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{B})) implies that f = \sum_{\lambda \in \mathcal{B}^*} c_\lambda T_\lambda^S \mathcal{R}g converges unconditionally provided that \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\mathcal{B}^*). In a similar fashion to the proof of statement (1) we conclude from Theorem 3.1(2) that

|V_gf(z)| = |V_g(f_\times)(z)| \ \ \forall z \in S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \mathcal{B}),

thereby proving the statement by invoking the inclusion given in (Proof).

Corollary

Corollary 3.3

YRAO

Let \mathcal{L} \subseteq {\mathbb R}^2 be an arbitrary lattice generated by L \in \mathrm{GL}_2({\mathbb R}) and let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R})} be a window function. If \alpha \coloneqq \det L then S \coloneqq \alpha^{-1} L is a symplectic matrix. Moreover, if \{ c_\lambda \} \subseteq {\mathbb C} is the defining sequence of f \in \mathcal{V}_{\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}}^S(\mathcal{R}g) then the following holds:

  1. If \{c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}) then

    |V_gf(z)| = |V_g(f_\times)(z)| \ \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L}.
  2. If \mathfrak{p}_{\alpha {\mathbb Z}} (\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g) \in L^\infty([0,\alpha]) and if \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}) then

    |V_gf(z)| = |V_g(f_\times)(z)| \ \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L}.
Used by Proof
Proof of Corollary 3.3

Proof of (1). Since 0 \neq \alpha = \det L, the matrix S=\alpha^{-1}L satisfies \det S = 1. Writing

S= \begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ c & d\end{pmatrix}, \ \ a,b,c,d \in {\mathbb R},

we obtain the relation ad-cd=1. In view of Lemma 2.3, this implies that S \in \mathrm{GL}_2({\mathbb R}) is a symplectic matrix. Now let T=\alpha I_2 \in {\mathbb R}^{2 \times 2}. Then L=ST and the reciprocal lattice of \alpha{\mathbb Z} is given by \alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}. Thus, Corollary 3.2 implies that if f \in \mathcal{V}_{\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}}^S(\mathcal{R}g) has defining sequence \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}) then the spectrogram of f and f_\times agree on

ST{\mathbb Z}^2 = L{\mathbb Z}^2 = \mathcal{L}.

Proof of (2). Suppose, on the other hand, that \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}). Since (\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z})^* = \alpha {\mathbb Z} and sine \mathcal{P}(\alpha{\mathbb Z})=[0,\alpha] \subseteq {\mathbb R}, the condition \mathfrak{p}_{(\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z})^*} (\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g) \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}((\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z})^*)) is equivalent to the condition \mathfrak{p}_{\alpha {\mathbb Z}}(\mu(S)^{-1}\mathcal{R}g) \in L^\infty([0,\alpha]). Under this assumption, Corollary 2.8 implies that f \in \mathcal{V}_{\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}}^S(\mathcal{R}g) converges unconditionally provided that f has defining sequence \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}). The derivation of statement (2) then follows analogously to the derivation of statement (1).

Lemma

Lemma 3.4

JI3B

Let \mathcal{Y} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a Lebesgue-measurable set of positive d-dimensional Lebesgue measure. If F : {\mathbb C}^d \to {\mathbb C} is a holomorphic function of d complex variables which vanishes on \mathcal{Y} then F vanishes identically.

Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 3.4

See the Appendix ?.

Theorem

Theorem 3.5

M0FB

Let 0 \neq \phi \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} and let \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice. Then the following holds:

  1. The system of {{\mathbb R}^d}-shifts of \phi, i.e., the set \{ T_x \phi : x \in {{\mathbb R}^d} \} forms a (finitely) linearly independent system.

  2. If there exist positive constants 0<A,B<\infty such that

    A \leq \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\phi](t) \leq B

    for almost every t \in \mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*) then \{ T_\lambda \phi : \lambda \in \Lambda \} is \ell^2(\Lambda)-independent, i.e., a sequence \{c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda) is the zero sequence provided that \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda T_\lambda \phi = 0.

Used by Proof
Proof of Theorem 3.5

Proof of (1). We start by proving the claim made in item (1). To that end, let \mathcal{X} \subset {{\mathbb R}^d} be a finite set, |\mathcal{X}|<\infty, and let c_x \in {\mathbb C} with x \in \mathcal{X}. Suppose that

\sum_{x \in \mathcal{X}} c_x T_x \phi = 0.

We have to show that c_x = 0 for every x \in \mathcal{X}. To do so, we take the Fourier transform on both sides of equation (Proof) and obtain the relation

\underbrace{\sum_{x \in \mathcal{X}} c_x e^{-2\pi i x \cdot t}}_{\coloneqq E(t)} {\mathcal{F}} \phi(t) = 0.

which holds for every t \in {\mathbb R}. Since \phi\neq 0 there exists a set \mathcal{Y} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} of positive d-dimensional Lebesgue measure such that {\mathcal{F}} \phi (t) \neq 0 for almost every t \in \mathcal{Y}. Hence, the map E must vanish almost everywhere on \mathcal{Y}. But E extends from {{\mathbb R}^d} to a holomorphic function of d complex variables. Therefore, Lemma 3.4 shows that E must vanish identically. Now observe that since \mathcal{X} is a set, all its elements are distinct. A general theorem on the linear independence of characters due to Artin [lang2005algebra, Theorem 4.1] shows that the complex exponentials t \mapsto e^{-2\pi i t \cdot x}, x \in \mathcal{X}, are linearly independent. Hence, the property that E vanishes identically implies that c_x=0 for all x \in \mathcal{X} and this concludes the proof of the claim.

Proof of (2). We continue with the proof of the second statement. First, observe that since \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\phi] \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*)) it follows from Proposition 2.7 that the series \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda T_\lambda \phi converges unconditionally for every \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda). Now suppose that \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda) is such that \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda T_\lambda \phi = 0. By taking the Fourier transform, we obtain the relation

\underbrace{\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda e^{-2 \pi i \lambda \cdot t}}_{\coloneqq G(t)} {\mathcal{F}} \phi(t) = 0

which holds for almost every t \in {{\mathbb R}^d}. By assumption we have that

\mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\phi](t) = \sum_{\lambda^* \in \Lambda^*} |{\mathcal{F}} \phi (t+\lambda^*)|^2 \geq A >0

for almost every t \in \mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*). Since \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\phi] is \Lambda^*-periodic, it follows that the lower bound given in equation (?) holds for almost every t \in {{\mathbb R}^d}. Moreover, it shows that there exists no measurable \Lambda^*-periodic set \Omega \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} of positive Lebesgue measure such that {\mathcal{F}} \phi vanishes almost everywhere on \Omega. Since the map G is \Lambda^*-periodic as well, equation (?) implies that G must vanish almost everywhere. The uniqueness theorem for Fourier coefficients finally shows that c_\lambda = 0 for every \lambda \in \Lambda, as desired.

Lemma

Lemma 3.6

SL95

Let Y be an arbitrary set, and let f : Y \to {\mathbb C} be a complex-valued map. Then f \sim \overline{f} if and only if there exists an \alpha \in {\mathbb R} such that f(y) \in e^{i\alpha}{\mathbb R} for every y \in Y.

Used by Proof
Definition

Definition 3.7

ERLX

Let \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice. We define the class of square-summable sequences with index set \Lambda whose elements do not lie on a line in the complex plane passing through the origin by

\ell^2_{\mathcal{O}}(\Lambda) \coloneqq \left \{ \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda) : \nexists \, \alpha \in {\mathbb R} \ \mathrm{s.t.} \ \{ c_\lambda \} \subseteq e^{i\alpha} {\mathbb R} \right \}.
Theorem

Theorem 3.8

KKP4

Let 0 \neq \phi \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}, let \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice, and let S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) be a symplectic matrix. Suppose that \{c_\lambda \} \subseteq {\mathbb C} is the defining sequence of f \in \mathcal{V}_\Lambda^S(\phi). Then the following holds:

  1. If \{c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda) then

    f \nsim f_\times \iff \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda).
  2. If there exist positive constants 0<A,B<\infty such that

    A \leq \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\mu(S)^{-1}\phi](t) \leq B

    for almost every t \in \mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*) then

    f \nsim f_\times \iff \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda).
Proof of Theorem 3.8

Proof of (1). We start by proving that \{c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda) implies that f \nsim f_\times. To this end, let \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda) \cap c_{00}(\Lambda) and suppose by contradiction that f \sim f_\times. Then there exists a constant \nu \in {\mathbb T} such that

\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda \mu(S)T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi = \nu \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} \overline{c_\lambda} \mu(S)T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi.

Since \mu(S) is invertible, it follows that

\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} (c_\lambda - \nu \overline{c_\lambda} )T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi = 0.

By assumption we have \phi \neq 0 and therefore the invertibility of \mu(S) implies that \mu(S)^{-1} \phi \neq 0. In view of Theorem 3.5 the system of translates \{ T_x \mu(S)^{-1} \phi : x \in {{\mathbb R}^d} \} forms a finitely linearly independent system. Since \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda) there exists a finite set U \subseteq \Lambda such that

\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} (c_\lambda - \nu \overline{c_\lambda} )T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi = \sum_{\lambda \in U} (c_\lambda - \nu \overline{c_\lambda} )T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi = 0.

Linear independence yields c_\lambda - \nu \overline{c_\lambda} = 0 for all \lambda \in U. Hence, the map U \to {\mathbb C}, \lambda \mapsto c_\lambda, is equivalent to its complex conjugate, whence Lemma 3.6 applies, and we conclude that all elements of the sequence \{ c_\lambda \} lie on a line in the complex plane passing through the origin. This contradicts the assumption that \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda).

We continue by proving the opposite direction, i.e., f \nsim f_\times implies that \{c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda). Since \{c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda) we have \{c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda) and it suffices to show that the elements of the sequence \{ c_\lambda \} do not lie on a line in the complex plane passing though the origin, provided that f \nsim f_\times. We prove the claim by contraposition, i.e., we assume that there exists an \alpha \in {\mathbb R} such that c_\lambda \in e^{i\alpha} {\mathbb R} for every \lambda \in \Lambda. Writing c_\lambda = e^{i\alpha}r_\lambda for some r_\lambda \in {\mathbb R} it follows that f and f_\times satisfy

f = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} e^{i \alpha} r_\lambda T_{\lambda}^S \phi, \ \ f_\times = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} e^{-i \alpha} r_\lambda T_{\lambda}^S \phi.

Hence, e^{2 i \alpha} f_\times = f and therefore f \sim f_\times. This concludes the proof of the first statement.

Proof of (2). For the second equivalence we start by showing that \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda) implies that f and f_\times are not equivalent, f \nsim f_\times. To this end, we assume that \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda) and f \sim f_\times and show that this leads to a contradiction. By Corollary 2.8, both series f = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda \mu(S)T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi and f_\times = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} \overline{c_\lambda } \mu(S)T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi converge unconditionally provided that \{c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda) \subseteq \ell^2(\Lambda). In particular, if f \sim f_\times then there exists a constant \nu \in {\mathbb T} such that

\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} (c_\lambda - \nu \overline{c_\lambda} )T_\lambda\mu(S)^{-1} \phi = 0.

According to Theorem 3.5(2), the lower boundedness of \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[\mu(S)^{-1}\phi] implies that the system \{ T_\lambda \mu(S)^{-1} : \lambda \in \Lambda \} is \ell^2(\Lambda)-independent. Hence, c_\lambda = \nu \overline{c_\lambda} for every \lambda \in \Lambda and Lemma 3.6 implies that the elements of the sequence \{ c_\lambda\} lie on a line in the complex plane passing through the origin, contradicting the assumption that \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda).

To prove the other direction, assume that \{ c_\lambda \} \notin \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda). Then there exists a constant \alpha \in {\mathbb R} such that c_\lambda \in e^{i\alpha}{\mathbb R} for every \lambda \in \Lambda. Therefore, for every \lambda \in \Lambda there exists a constant r_\lambda \in {\mathbb R} such that c_\lambda = e^{i\alpha} r_\lambda. This implies that e^{2 i \alpha} f_\times = f and consequently f \sim f_\times.

Definition

Definition 3.9

L1IJ

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} and let \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}}. Then (g,\mathcal{L}) is called a uniqueness pair if every f \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} is determined up to a global phase by |V_gf(\mathcal{L})|, i.e.,

|V_gf(z)| = |V_gh(z)| \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L} \implies f \sim h

whenever f,h \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}.

Theorem

Theorem 3.10 (Thm. 1.1 in Sec. ?)

JGW0

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be an arbitrary window function, and let \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}}. Then (g,\mathcal{L}) is never a uniqueness pair, provided that \mathcal{L} satisfies one of the following two conditions:

  1. \mathcal{L}=S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \Lambda) where S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) is a symplectic matrix and \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} is a lattice.

  2. \mathcal{L}=L{\mathbb Z}^{2d} is a lattice with generating matrix L \in \mathrm{GL}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) which factors into L=ST where S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) is symplectic and T is a block-diagonal matrix of the form

    T = \begin{pmatrix} A & 0 \\ 0 & B \end{pmatrix}, \ \ A,B \in \mathrm{GL}_d({\mathbb R}).
Proof of Theorem 3.10

Proof of (1). The case g=0 is trivial. Therefore, assume in the following that g \neq 0. For the first statement consider a function f \in \mathcal{V}_{\Lambda^*}^S(\mathcal{R}g) with defining sequence \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*). According to Theorem 3.1, the spectrogram of f coincides with the spectrogram of f_\times on the set S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \Lambda). Moreover, Theorem 3.8(1) shows that f \nsim f_\times. This proves the first claim.

Proof of (2). Let \mathcal{B}=B{\mathbb Z}^d be the lattice generated by B. According to statement (1), there exists two functions in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} which do not agree up to a global phase, but their spectrograms agree on S({\mathbb R}^d \times \mathcal{B}). The assertion is therefore a consequence of the inclusion

\mathcal{L}=L{\mathbb Z}^{2d} = S(A{\mathbb Z}^d \times B {\mathbb Z}^d) \subseteq S({\mathbb R}^d \times \mathcal{B}).
Theorem

Theorem 3.11 (Walnut)

PF2T

Let g \in W({{\mathbb R}^d}) with

W({{\mathbb R}^d}) = \left \{ h \in L^\infty({{\mathbb R}^d}) : \sum_{n \in {\mathbb Z}^d} \operatorname*{ess\,sup}_{x \in [0,1]^d} |h(x+n)| < \infty \right \}

denoting the Wiener-amalgam space. If \alpha,a,b>0 are such that

a \leq \sum_{k \in {\mathbb Z}^d} |g(x-\alpha k)|^2 \leq b

for almost every x \in {{\mathbb R}^d} then there exists a constant \beta_0 = \beta_0(\alpha) > 0 such that \mathcal{G}(g,\alpha{\mathbb Z}^d \times \beta {\mathbb Z}^d) is a Gabor frame for every 0<\beta\leq \beta_0.

Corollary

Corollary 3.12 (Cor. 1.2 in Sec. ?)

7Y23

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be an arbitrary window function, and let \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}}. Then (g,\mathcal{L}) is never a uniqueness pair, provided that \mathcal{L} is a lattice of the following form:

  1. \mathcal{L} = \alpha S{\mathbb Z}^{2d} with S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) a symplectic matrix and \alpha>0 an arbitrary density parameter.

  2. \mathcal{L} is rectangular, i.e. it is generated by an invertible diagonal matrix.

  3. \mathcal{L} is separable.

  4. \mathcal{L}=\alpha {\mathbb Z}^d \times \beta {\mathbb Z}^d with arbitrary density parameters \alpha,\beta \in {\mathbb R} \setminus \{ 0 \}.

Used by Remark 3.14
Proof of Corollary 3.12

Let L \in \mathrm{GL}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) be the generating matrix of \mathcal{L}. All of the assertions follow from Theorem 3.10 via a suitable decomposition of L. If \mathcal{L}=\alpha S {\mathbb Z}^{2d}, S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}), \alpha > 0, is a symplectic lattice, then \mathcal{L} is generated by ST with T= \alpha I_{2d}. If \mathcal{L} is rectangular, then \mathcal{L} is generated by ST with S=I_{2d} and T=\mathrm{diag}(\alpha_1, \dots, \alpha_{2d}), \alpha_j \in {\mathbb R} \setminus \{ 0 \}, j \in \{1, \dots, 2d \}. If \mathcal{L}=A{\mathbb Z}^d \times B {\mathbb Z}^d, A,B \in \mathrm{GL}_d({\mathbb R}), is a separable lattice, then \mathcal{L} is generated by ST with S=I_{2d} and

T = \begin{pmatrix} A & 0 \\ 0 & B \end{pmatrix}, \ \ A,B \in \mathrm{GL}_d({\mathbb R}).

In particular, \alpha {\mathbb Z}^d \times \beta {\mathbb Z}^d is a separable lattice whenever \alpha,\beta > 0.

Remark

Remark 3.13 (Shifted lattices)

EMJH

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be a window function, and suppose that \mathcal{L} = L{\mathbb Z}^{2d} is a lattice as given in Theorem 3.10, i.e., L=ST with S symplectic and T block-diagonal. According to Theorem 3.10 there exist f_1,f_2 \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} such that

|V_g(f_1)(z)| = |V_g(f_2)(z)| \ \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L}

and f_2 \nsim f_2. For every p=(a,b), z=(x,\omega) \in {{\mathbb R}^d} \times {{\mathbb R}^d} and every u \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}, the covariance property of the STFT (Lemma 2.1(2)) shows that

V_gu(p+z) = V_gu(a+x,b+\omega) = e^{-2 \pi i a \cdot \omega} V_g(T_{-a}M_{-b}u)(z).

Accordingly, if f_1,f_2 are given as above and h_1,h_2 are defined by

\begin{split} h_1 & \coloneqq M_b T_a f_1 \\ h_2 & \coloneqq M_b T_a f_2 \end{split}

then the equations (3.13) and (?) imply that

|V_g(h_1)(y)| = |V_g(h_2)(y)| \ \ \forall y \in p + \mathcal{L}.

Further, the property of two functions being equal up to a global phase is invariant under time-frequency shifts. Hence, f_1 \nsim f_2 if and only if h_1 \nsim h_2. This shows that the conclusions of Theorem 3.10 hold true if the lattice \mathcal{L} is replaced by a shifted lattice p+\mathcal{L} with p \in {\mathbb R}^{2d} an arbitrary vector.

Remark

Remark 3.14 (Restriction to more regular functions spaces)

QANO

Let \mathcal{L} = \mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B} be a separable lattice with \mathcal{A},\mathcal{B} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} and let g \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d}) be a window function. According to Corollary 3.12 it holds that (g,\mathcal{L}) is not a uniqueness pair. More precisely, the proof of Theorem 3.10 shows that if f \in \mathcal{V}_{\mathcal{B}^*}^S(\mathcal{R}g) = \mathcal{V}_{\mathcal{B}^*}(\mathcal{R}g) (S=I_{2d} since the lattice is separable) has defining sequence \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\mathcal{B}^*) \cap \ell^2_{\mathcal{O}}(\mathcal{B}^*) then f \nsim f_\times but |V_gf(\mathcal{L})| = |V_g(f_\times)(\mathcal{L})|. Observe that f and f_\times are a finite linear combination of ordinary shifts of \mathcal{R}g. Thus, if g satisfies a certain regularity property such as g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} \cap C^n({{\mathbb R}^d}), \, n \in {\mathbb N} \cup \{ \infty \}, then f,f_\times \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} \cap C^n({{\mathbb R}^d}), and the corresponding counterexamples are of the same regularity as g. This shows the non-existence of a critical sampling density in a restriction of the problem from L^2({{\mathbb R}^d}) to L^2({{\mathbb R}^d}) \cap C^n({\mathbb R}). It is worth mentioning that in recent years the STFT phase retrieval problem was studied primarily for the Gaussian window. In this case, the counterexamples f and f_\times are even analytic. On the other hand, if one makes a restriction to functions which satisfy an additional shift-invariant structure, then lattice uniqueness is indeed possible. Related results were shown for Paley-Wiener spaces and Gaussian shift-invariant spaces [grohsliehr1]. The recovery of a real-valued function in a shift-invariant space from unsigned samples of the function itself was studied in [1Thakur2011, 2Groechenig2020, 3Romero2021, 4Alaifari2017].

Theorem

Theorem 3.15 (Thm. 1.3 in Sec. ?)

V1QC

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be an arbitrary window function. If \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}} satisfies \mathcal{L} \subseteq S({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \Lambda) for some symplectic matrix S \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) and some lattice \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} then the set

C \coloneqq \left \{ f \in \mathcal{V}_{\Lambda^*}^S(\mathcal{R}g) : f = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda^*} c_\lambda T_\lambda^S\mathcal{R}g, \ \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) \right \}

is an infinite-dimensional cone which is contained in \mathcal{N}(g,\mathcal{L}).

Proof of Theorem 3.15

If \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) then for every \kappa > 0 we have \{ \kappa c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) which shows that c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) is a cone in \ell^2(\Lambda^*). Moreover, this cone is infinite-dimensional. These observations readily imply that the set C as defined above is an infinite-dimensional cone in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}. Now suppose that f \in C has defining sequence \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*). Since both \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) and c_{00}(\Lambda^*) are invariant under complex conjugation, we have \{ \overline{c_\lambda} \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) which gives f_\times \in C. But f_\times \nsim f by Theorem 3.8(1), and |V_gf(\mathcal{L}| = |V_g(f_\times)(\mathcal{L})| by Theorem 3.1. This shows that C \subseteq \mathcal{N}(g,\mathcal{L}) which yields the assertion of the theorem.

Example

Example I

7F40

Let \Lambda be the scaled standard rectangular lattice \Lambda=8{\mathbb Z}^2 and define \lambda_1,\lambda_2,\lambda_3 \in \Lambda and c_{\lambda_1},c_{\lambda_2},c_{\lambda_3} \in {\mathbb C} via

\begin{aligned} \lambda_1 &=(0,0), & \lambda_2&=(1,0), & \lambda_3&=(0,1), \\ c_{\lambda_1} &= 1, & c_{\lambda_2} &= i, & c_{\lambda_3} &= 1+i. \end{aligned}

The set of points \{ 1,i,1+i \} does not lie on a line in the complex plane passing through the origin, which implies that \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda) \cap \ell_\mathcal{O}^2(\Lambda). Consequently, if

f_1 = c_1 T_{\lambda_1} \mathcal{R}g+c_2 T_{\lambda_2} \mathcal{R}g+c_3 T_{\lambda_3} \mathcal{R}g

then according to Theorem 3.1, and Theorem 3.8, Q_xf_1 vanishes on \Lambda^* = \tfrac{1}{8}{\mathbb Z}^2 and f_1 \nsim (f_1)_\times. Contour plots of Q_xf_1 for different choices of x are provided in Figure ?.

The paper has a figure here, which this page does not show.
Example

Example II

KOJ7

Suppose that \Lambda is generated by the matrix B \in \mathrm{GL}_2({\mathbb R}) defined by

B = 5 \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ -\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}} & \tfrac{2}{\sqrt{3}} \end{pmatrix} = (a,b), \ \ a = \begin{pmatrix} 5 \\ -\tfrac{5}{\sqrt{3}} \end{pmatrix}, \ \ b=\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ \tfrac{10}{\sqrt{3}} \end{pmatrix}.

Further, define \lambda_1,\lambda_2,\lambda_3,\lambda_4 \in \Lambda and c_{\lambda_1},c_{\lambda_2},c_{\lambda_3},c_{\lambda_4} \in {\mathbb C} via

\begin{aligned} \lambda_1 &=(0,0), & \lambda_2&=a, & \lambda_3&=b & \lambda_4&=a+b, \\ c_{\lambda_1} &= 1, & c_{\lambda_2} &= i, & c_{\lambda_3} &= 1+i & c_{\lambda_4}&=\tfrac{1}{2}+\tfrac{1}{2}i \end{aligned}

and let

\begin{split} f_2 & = c_{\lambda_1} T_{\lambda_1} \mathcal{R}g+c_{\lambda_2} T_{\lambda_2} \mathcal{R}g+c_{\lambda_3} T_{\lambda_3} \mathcal{R}g, \\ f_3 & = c_{\lambda_1}T_{\lambda_1} \mathcal{R}g+c_{\lambda_2} T_{\lambda_2} \mathcal{R}g+ c_{\lambda_3} T_{\lambda_3} \mathcal{R}g+c_{\lambda_4} T_{\lambda_4} \mathcal{R}g. \end{split}

Contour plots of Q_xf_2 and Q_xf_3 are provided in Figure ?. Note that both Q_xf_2 and Q_xf_3 vanish on \Lambda^* which is the lattice generated by the matrix B^{-T},

B^{-T} = \frac{1}{5} \begin{pmatrix} 1 & \tfrac{1}{2} \\ 0 & \tfrac{\sqrt{3}}{2} \end{pmatrix}.

This is the generating matrix of a scaled hexagonal lattice [conway_sphere, p. 5].

The paper has a figure here, which this page does not show.
Theorem

Theorem 3.16 (Thm. 1.4 in Sec. ?)

5L6I

Let g \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) be a real-valued window function, and let \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}} be a separable lattice. Then there exist f_1,f_2 \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} such that

  1. |V_g(f_1)(z)|=|V_g(f_2)(z)| for all z \in \mathcal{L}

  2. |f_1(t)| = |f_2(t)| for all t \in {{\mathbb R}^d}

  3. f_1 \nsim f_2.

Proof of Theorem 3.16

Suppose that \mathcal{L} = \mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B} such that \mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B} are lattices in {{\mathbb R}^d} generated by the matrices A,B \in \mathrm{GL}_d({\mathbb R}), respectively. For a non-zero element 0 \neq \lambda \in \mathcal{B}^* of the reciprocal lattice of \mathcal{B}, define

f_1 \coloneqq T_{-\lambda} \mathcal{R}g + i T_\lambda \mathcal{R}g \in \mathcal{V}_{\mathcal{B}^*}(\mathcal{R}g).

Further, let f_2 \coloneqq (f_1)_\times be the corresponding function which has a complex-conjugate defining sequence, i.e.,

f_2 \coloneqq T_{-\lambda} \mathcal{R}g - i T_\lambda \mathcal{R}g.

Since \mathcal{V}_{\mathcal{B}^*}(\mathcal{R}g) = \mathcal{V}_{\mathcal{B}^*}^S(\mathcal{R}g) with S=I_{2d}, Theorem 3.1 shows that

|V_g(f_1)(z)|=|V_g(f_2)(z)|

for every z \in {{\mathbb R}^d} \times (\mathcal{B}^*)^* = {{\mathbb R}^d} \times \mathcal{B} \supseteq \mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B} which yields property (1). Since g is real-valued, we have f_1 = \overline{f_2}. Thus, |f_1|=|f_2| which shows that property (2) is satisfied. Property (3) follows by selection of f_1: we have

f_1 \coloneqq c_{-\lambda} T_{-\lambda} \mathcal{R}g + c_\lambda T_\lambda \mathcal{R}g

with c_{-\lambda}=1 and c_\lambda=i. The set \{ 1,i \} does not lie on a line in the complex plane passing through the origin. Hence, the defining sequence \{ c_\lambda \} \subseteq {\mathbb C} of f_1 satisfies \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\mathcal{B}^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\mathcal{B}^*). In particular, Theorem 3.8 shows that f_1 \nsim (f_1)_\times = f_2 and this concludes the proof of the statement.

Definition

Definition 3.17

YF9E

Let \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice. We define the subspace of Hermitian sequences in \ell^2(\Lambda) via

\ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda) \coloneqq \left \{ \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2(\Lambda) : c_{-\lambda} = \overline{c_{\lambda}} \right \}.
Proposition

Proposition 3.18

W290

Let \phi \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) be real-valued, and let \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice. Suppose that \{c_\lambda \} \subseteq {\mathbb C} is the defining sequence of f \in \mathcal{V}_\Lambda^{-\mathcal{J}}(\phi) where \mathcal{J} \in \mathrm{Sp}_{2d}({\mathbb R}) denotes the standard symplectic matrix. Then the following holds:

  1. If \{c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda) then f is real-valued.

  2. If \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[{\mathcal{F}^{-1}} \phi] \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*)) then f is real-valued provided that \{ c_\lambda \} \in \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda).

Used by Proof, Proof
Proof of Proposition 3.18

Proof of (1). If \mathcal{J} denotes the standard symplectic matrix, then \mu(-\mathcal{J})={\mathcal{F}} is the Fourier transform [Groechenig, Example 9.4.1]. Hence, if \{c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda) is the defining sequence of f then

f = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda {\mathcal{F}} T_\lambda {\mathcal{F}}^{-1} \phi = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda} c_\lambda M_{-\lambda} \phi.

Consider a partition of the lattice \Lambda of the form

\Lambda = \{ 0 \} \cup I_+ \cup I_- \ \ \text{s.t.} \ \ -I_+ = I_-.

Using this partition, the map f can be written as

\begin{split} f(t) &= c_0 \phi(t) + \sum_{\lambda \in I_+} c_\lambda M_{-\lambda} \phi + \sum_{\lambda \in I_-} c_\lambda M_{-\lambda} \phi(t) \\ & = c_0 \phi(t) + \sum_{\lambda \in I_+} c_\lambda M_{-\lambda} \phi + \sum_{\lambda \in I_+} c_{-\lambda} M_{\lambda} \phi(t) \\ & = c_0 \phi(t) + \sum_{\lambda \in I_+} \left ( c_\lambda e^{-2\pi i \lambda t} + \overline{c_\lambda e^{-2\pi i \lambda t}} \right ) \phi(t) \\ & = c_0 \phi(t) + \sum_{\lambda \in I_+} 2 {\mathrm{Re} \,} \left ( c_\lambda e^{-2\pi i \lambda t} \right ) \phi(t), \end{split}

where we use the fact that \{ c_\lambda \} belongs to the set \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda). This property of \{ c_\lambda \} further implies that c_0 \in {\mathbb R}. Since \phi is real-valued, the identity derived in equation (Proof) shows that f is real-valued.

Proof of (2). To prove the second statement we observe that if \mathfrak{p}_{\Lambda^*}[{\mathcal{F}^{-1}} u] \in L^\infty(\mathcal{P}(\Lambda^*)) then by Proposition 2.7 the series given in equation (Proof) converges unconditionally. With an argument analogous to the previous case we obtain the relation

f(t) = c_0 \phi(t) + \sum_{\lambda \in I_+} 2 {\mathrm{Re} \,} \left ( c_\lambda e^{-2\pi i \lambda t} \right ) \phi(t)

with a suitable choice of I_+ \subseteq \Lambda. Thus, f is real-valued.

Theorem

Theorem 3.19 (Thm. 1.5 in Sec. ?)

KV07

Let g \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) be a real-valued window function, and suppose that \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} satisfies one of the following conditions:

  1. \mathcal{L} = \Lambda \times {\mathbb R}^d with \Lambda a lattice in {{\mathbb R}^d}

  2. \mathcal{L} is a separable lattice of the form \mathcal{L} = \mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B} where \mathcal{A} and \mathcal{B} are lattices in {{\mathbb R}^d}.

Then there exists two real-valued functions f_1,f_2 \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) such that

|V_g(f_1)(z)| = |V_g(f_2)(z)| \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L} \ \ \text{and} \ \ f_1 \nsim f_2.
Used by Proof
Proof of Theorem 3.19

Let \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} be a lattice, and suppose that f_1 \in \mathcal{V}_{\Lambda^*}^{-\mathcal{J}}(\mathcal{R}g) has defining sequence \{ c_\lambda \} belonging to the non-empty intersection c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda^*). Set f_2 \coloneqq (f_1)_\times. According to Theorem 3.8 we have f_1 \nsim f_2. In addition, Proposition 3.18 shows that f_1 is real-valued. Noting that both c_{00}(\Lambda^*) and \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda^*) are invariant under complex conjugation shows that f_2 is real-valued as well. Finally, Theorem 3.1 implies that

|V_g(f_1)(z)| = |V_g(f_2)(z)|

for every z \in -\mathcal{J}({{\mathbb R}^d} \times \Lambda) = \Lambda \times (-{{\mathbb R}^d}) = \Lambda \times {{\mathbb R}^d}. The second part of the statement follows from the property that every separable lattice \mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B} is contained in a set of the form \Lambda \times {{\mathbb R}^d}.

Corollary

Corollary 3.20 (Cor. 1.6 in Sec. ?)

4UP3

Suppose that \mathcal{L} \subseteq {\mathbb R}^{2d} is a lattice which is generated by an invertible matrix L with rational entries, L \in \mathrm{GL}_{2d}({\mathbb Q}). Then for every real-valued window function g \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) there exists two real-values functions f_1,f_2 \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) such that

  1. |V_g(f_1)(z)| = |V_g(f_2)(z)| for every z \in \mathcal{L}

  2. f_1 \nsim f_2.

Proof of Corollary 3.20

Let q_i = (q_{i,1}, \dots, q_{i,2d} ) \in {\mathbb Q}^{2d}, i \in \{ 1, \dots, 2d \}, be the row vectors of L. Since every q_{ij} is rational, we can write q_{ij} = \frac{a_{ij}}{b_{ij}}, a_{ij} \in {\mathbb Z}, b_{ij} \in {\mathbb Z} \setminus \{ 0 \}. As a consequence, we have

q_i = \frac{1}{\prod_{j=1}^{2d} b_{ij}} (c_{i1}, \dots, c_{i,2d}), \ \ c_{ij} = a_{ij} \prod_{k=1, k \neq j}^{2d} b_{ik}.

Now let c_i \coloneqq (c_{i1}, \dots, c_{i,2d}) and define

D \coloneqq \mathrm{diag} \left ( \frac{1}{\prod_{j=1}^{2d} b_{1j}}, \frac{1}{\prod_{j=1}^{2d} b_{2j}}, \dots, \frac{1}{\prod_{j=1}^{2d} b_{2d,j}} \right ).

If z \in {\mathbb Z}^{2d} then in view of the notations above the product Lz satisfies

Lz = \begin{pmatrix} q_1 \cdot z \\ \vdots \\ q_{2d} \cdot z \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} \frac{1}{\prod_{j=1}^{2d} b_{1j}} c_1 \cdot z \\ \vdots \\ \frac{1}{\prod_{j=1}^{2d} b_{2d,j}} c_{2d} \cdot z \end{pmatrix} = D \begin{pmatrix} c_1 \cdot z \\ \vdots \\ c_{2d} \cdot z \end{pmatrix}.

Since c_j \cdot z \in {\mathbb Z} for every j \in \{ 1, \dots, 2d \} it follows from equation (Proof) that \mathcal L \subseteq \mathcal{D} where \mathcal{D} is the lattice generated by the diagonal matrix D. Since \mathcal{D} is separable, Theorem 3.19 implies the existence of two real-valued functions f_1, f_2 \in L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}) such that |V_g(f_1)(w)| = |V_g(f_2)(w)| for every w \in \mathcal{D} and, in addition, f_1 \nsim f_2. The statement follows from the inclusion \mathcal{L} \subseteq \mathcal{D}.

Theorem

Theorem 3.21 (Thm. 1.7 in Sec. ?)

NAW2

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} be an arbitrary real-valued window function. If \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}} satisfies \mathcal{L} \subseteq \Lambda \times {{\mathbb R}^d} for some lattice \Lambda \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^d} then the set

C \coloneqq \left \{ f \in \mathcal{V}_{\Lambda^*}^{-\mathcal{J}}(\mathcal{R}g) : f = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda^*} c_\lambda T_\lambda^{-\mathcal{J}}\mathcal{R}g, \ \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda^*) \right \}

is an infinite-dimensional cone which is contained in \mathcal{N}_{\mathbb R}(g,\mathcal{L}).

Proof of Theorem 3.21

If \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda^*) then for every \kappa > 0 we have \{ \kappa c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda^*) which shows that c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda^*) is a cone in \ell^2(\Lambda^*). Moreover, this cone is infinite-dimensional. These observations readily imply that the set C as defined above is an infinite-dimensional cone in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}. Proposition 3.18 shows that every element in C is real-valued and therefore C \subseteq L^2({{\mathbb R}^d},{\mathbb R}). Now suppose that f \in C has defining sequence \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda^*). Since \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*), c_{00}(\Lambda^*) and \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda^*) are invariant under complex conjugation, we have \{ \overline{c_\lambda} \} \in c_{00}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\Lambda^*) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{H}(\Lambda^*) which gives f_\times \in C. But f_\times \nsim f by Theorem 3.8(1) and |V_gf(\mathcal{L}| = |V_g(f_\times)(\mathcal{L})| by Theorem 3.1. This shows that C \subseteq \mathcal{N}_{\mathbb R}(g,\mathcal{L}).

Corollary

Corollary 3.22 (Main theorem of)

CNUU

Let g \in {L^2({\mathbb R}^d)} and let \mathcal{L} \subseteq {{\mathbb R}^{2d}} be an arbitrary lattice. If d=1 then (g,\mathcal{L}) is not a uniqueness pair.

Proof of Corollary 3.22

Let \alpha \coloneqq \det L, S \coloneqq \alpha^{-1}L \in \mathrm{Sp}_2({\mathbb R}) and let \{ c_\lambda \} \subseteq {\mathbb C} be the defining sequence of f \in \mathcal{V}_{\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}}^S(\mathcal{R}g) such that \{ c_\lambda \} \in c_{00}(\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}) \cap \ell^2_\mathcal{O}(\alpha^{-1}{\mathbb Z}). According to Corollary 3.3 it holds that |V_gf(z)| = |V_g(f_\times)(z)| for every z \in \mathcal{L} whereas f \nsim f_\times by Theorem 3.8. This yields the assertion.

Remark

Remark 3.23 (Fock spaces)

9UVU

Let z = x+i\omega \in {\mathbb C}, x,\omega \in {\mathbb R}, and let \mu be the Gaussian measure d\mu(z) = e^{-\pi |z|^2} \, dxdy. The Bargmann-Fock space F^2({\mathbb C}) is the collection of all entire functions a : {\mathbb C} \to {\mathbb C} for which

\| a \|_{F^2({\mathbb C})} \coloneqq \int_{\mathbb C} |a(z)|^2 \, d\mu(z) < \infty.

If f \in {L^2({\mathbb R})} then we can define an entire function Bf : {\mathbb C} \to {\mathbb C} via

Bf(z) = 2^{\frac{1}{4}} \int_{\mathbb R} f(t) e^{2\pi t z - \pi t^2 - \frac{\pi}{2}z^2} \, dt.

The map Bf is called the Bargmann transform of f and it can be shown that B is an isometry mapping {L^2({\mathbb R})} onto F^2({\mathbb C}) [zhu, Theorem 6.8]. The Bargmann transform is closely related to the STFT with Gaussian window. If \varphi(t) = 2^{\frac{1}{4}} e^{-\pi t^2} then for every f \in {L^2({\mathbb R})} and every z = x+i\omega \in {\mathbb C}, x,\omega \in {\mathbb R}, we have

V_\varphi f(x,-\omega) = e^{\pi i x \omega - \frac{\pi}{2}|z|^2} Bf(z).

In other words, V_\varphi f is equal to Bf up to a reflection and up to a multiplicative non-zero weighting factor which is independent of f. In particular, if \mathcal{L} \subseteq {\mathbb R}^2 then according to [Groechenig, Proposition 3.4.1], for every f,h \in {L^2({\mathbb R})} we have

\begin{split} & |V_\varphi f(x,-\omega)| = |V_\varphi h(x,-\omega)| \ \ \forall (x,\omega) \in \mathcal{L} \\ \iff & |Bf(x+i\omega)| = |Bh(x+i\omega)|\ \ \forall (x,\omega) \in \mathcal{L}. \end{split}

Classical uniqueness theory in Bargmann-Fock spaces shows that if \mathcal{L}=L{\mathbb Z}^2 \subseteq {\mathbb R}^2 \simeq {\mathbb C}, L \in \mathrm{GL}_2({\mathbb R}), is a lattice such that \det L \leq 1 then \mathcal{L} is a uniqueness set for F^2({\mathbb C}), i.e., two functions a,b \in F^2({\mathbb C}) are identical provided that a and b agree on \mathcal{L} [BARGMANN1971221, Perelomov1971, Seip+1992+91+106]. In an analogous and frequently used terminology, this means that the system of coherent states \{ e^{2 \pi i \omega t} \varphi(t-x) : (x,\omega) \in \mathcal{L} \} is complete in {L^2({\mathbb R})}. Now observe that the Bargmann transform is a linear bijection between {L^2({\mathbb R})} and F^2({\mathbb C}) and that \mathcal{L}' \coloneqq \{ (x,-\omega) : (x,\omega) \in \mathcal{L} \} is a lattice provided that \mathcal{L} is a lattice. Combing these observations with Corollary 3.22 and the equivalence given in equation (?) shows that for every lattice \mathcal{L} \subseteq {\mathbb R}^2 \simeq {\mathbb C} there exists two functions a,b \in F^2({\mathbb C}) such that

|a(z)| = |b(z)| \ \ \forall z \in \mathcal{L} \ \ \mathrm{and} \ \ a \nsim b,

in complete contrast to the setting where phase information is present.

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2207.05628v2 by Philipp Grohs and Lukas Liehr, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2207/2207.05628.jsonl.