MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968877023 · doi:10.1109/cbms.2012.6266371

Sparse principal component extraction and classification of long-term biomedical signals

2012· article· en· W1968877023 on OpenAlexafffund
Shengkun Xie, Sridhar Krishnan, Anna T. Ławniczak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphToronto Metropolitan University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisPattern recognition (psychology)Sparse approximationComputer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Artificial intelligenceTerm (time)Signal reconstructionRobust principal component analysisRepresentation (politics)Functional principal component analysisFeature extractionSet (abstract data type)SegmentationSignal processingData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on finding a solution of sparse representation for signal classification in long-term observational studies. An approach that involves sparse principal component analysis (SPCA) is proposed. This method first uses a non-overlapping moving window for signal segmentation and makes use of SPCA to select a limited number of signal segments for constructing sparse principal components. A set of supervised predictive models based on sparse principal components of training signal segments is then constructed for signal approximation. Within this approach, their model residuals are estimated and used for signal classification. A nearly perfect classification accuracy is obtained for both the synthetic data and EEG signals that we considered. This highly positive result suggests that the proposed method may be useful for automatic event detection in long-term observational signals.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207