MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967745774 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2010.5496251

Modified hierarchical clustering for sparse component analysis

2010· article· en· W1967745774 on OpenAlexaff
Nasser Mourad, J.P. Reilly

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisMixing (physics)Hierarchical clusteringBlind signal separationComputer scienceMatrix (chemical analysis)AlgorithmSparse matrixMeasure (data warehouse)Component analysisIndependent component analysisPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The under-determined blind source separation (BSS) problem is usually solved using the sparse component analysis (SCA) technique. In SCA, the BSS is usually solved in two steps, where the mixing matrix is estimated in the first step, while the sources are estimated in the second step. In this paper we propose a novel clustering algorithm for estimating the mixing matrix and the number of sources, which is usually unknown. The proposed algorithm is based on incorporating a statistical test with a hierarchical clustering (HC) algorithm. The proposed algorithm is based on sequentially extracting compact clusters that have been constructed by the HC algorithm, where the extraction decision is based on the statistical test. To identify the number of sources, as well as the clusters corresponding to the columns of the mixing matrix, we develop a quantitative measure called the concentration parameters. Two numerical examples are presented to present the ability of the proposed algorithm in estimating the mixing matrix and the number of sources.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207