MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975997915 · doi:10.1117/12.487947

Design and analysis of supervised and decision-directed estimators of the MMSE/LCMV filter in data-limited environments

2003· article· en· W1975997915 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey M. Farrell, Ioannis Psaromiligkos, Stella N. Batalama

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Adaptive Filtering Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorMinimum mean square errorComputer scienceMean squared errorFilter (signal processing)AlgorithmSample matrix inversionFilter designAdaptive filterStatisticsSIGNAL (programming language)Minimum-variance unbiased estimatorCovariance matrixControl theory (sociology)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we quantify theoretically the effect of the desired-signal power level on the mean square filter estimation error and the normalized output signal-to-interference-plus-noise-ratio (SINR) of sample matrix inversion (SMI)-type estimates of the minimum mean-square-error (MMSE) and the linearly constrained minimum variance (LCMV) filters. We prove that in finite data support situations filters that utilize a sample average estimate of the desired-signal-absent input correlation matrix exhibit superior normalized filter output SINR and mean square filter estimation error when compared to filters that utilize a sample average estimate of the desired-signal-present input correlation matrix. Finally, we investigate pilot-assisted and decision-directed adaptive filter implementations that exhibit near desired-signal-absent SMI-filtering performance while they are trained using desired-signal-present data/observations.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Adaptive Filtering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207