Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a general framework for reconstructing sparse images from undersampled (squared)-magnitude data corrupted with outliers and noise. This phase retrieval method uses a layered approach, combining repeated minimization of a convex majorizer (surrogate for a nonconvex objective function), and iterative optimization of that majorizer using a preconditioned variant of the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM). Since phase retrieval is nonconvex, this implementation uses multiple initial majorization vectors. The introduction of a robust 1-norm data fit term that is better adapted to outliers exploits the generality of this framework. The derivation also describes a normalization scheme for the regularization parameter and a known adaptive heuristic for the ADMM penalty parameter. Both 1D Monte Carlo tests and 2D image reconstruction simulations suggest the proposed framework, with the robust data fit term, reduces the reconstruction error for data corrupted with both outliers and additive noise, relative to competing algorithms having the same total computation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it