5956727cecc57052.tex
1: \begin{abstract}
2: \sloppy We provide a new upper bound for sampling numbers $(g_n)_{n\in \N}$ associated to the compact embedding of a separable reproducing kernel Hilbert space into the space of square integrable functions. There are universal constants $C,c>0$ (which are specified in the paper) such that
3: $$
4: 	g^2_n \leq \frac{C\log(n)}{n}\sum\limits_{k\geq \lfloor cn \rfloor} \sigma_k^2\quad,\quad n\geq 2\,,
5: $$
6: where $(\sigma_k)_{k\in \N}$ is the sequence of singular numbers (approximation numbers) of the Hilbert-Schmidt embedding $\Id:H(K) \to L_2(D,\varrho_D)$. The algorithm which realizes the bound is a least squares algorithm based on a specific set of sampling nodes. These are constructed out of a random draw in combination with a down-sampling procedure coming from the celebrated proof of Weaver's conjecture, which was shown to be equivalent to the Kadison-Singer problem. Our result is non-constructive since we only show the existence of a linear sampling operator realizing the above bound. The general result can for instance be applied to the well-known situation of $H^s_{\text{mix}}(\tor^d)$ in $L_2(\tor^d)$ with $s>1/2$. We obtain the asymptotic bound
7: $$
8: 	g_n \leq C_{s,d}n^{-s}\log(n)^{(d-1)s+1/2}\,,
9: $$
10: which improves on very recent results by shortening the gap between upper and lower bound to $\sqrt{\log(n)}$. The result implies that for dimensions $d>2$ any sparse grid sampling recovery method does not perform asymptotically optimal.
11: 
12: \small
13: \medskip
14: \noindent {\textit{Keywords and phrases}} : Sampling recovery,  Least squares approximation, Random sampling, Weaver's conjecture, Finite frames, Kadison-Singer problem
15: 
16: \medskip
17: 
18: \small%
19: \noindent {\textit{2010 AMS Mathematics Subject Classification}} :
20: 41A25, % Rate of convergence, degree of approximation
21: 41A63, % Multidimensional problems (should also be assigned at least one other classification number in this section)
22: 68Q25, % Analysis of algorithms and problem complexity
23: 65Y20.
24: \end{abstract}
25: