MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976582586 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2006.277759

An Implementation of �-Divergence for Blind Source Separation

2006· article· en· W1976582586 on OpenAlexaff
N. Gadhok, Witold Kinsner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlind signal separationIndependent component analysisComputer scienceOutlierDivergence (linguistics)Broyden–Fletcher–Goldfarb–Shanno algorithmSource separationSignal processingPreprocessorAlgorithmSource codeSIGNAL (programming language)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Digital signal processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Life sustaining biomedical signal processing demands a guarantee that the results produced are accurate and precise. The separation of sources (e.g., demixing two heart signals, one from a mother, and one from a fetus) based only on observations of those mixtures, known as the blind source separation problem, is seen by researchers and scientists as a necessary preprocessing step in order to obtain uncontaminated data for analysis. A method from the field of intelligent signal processing called independent component analysis (ICA) is a promising solution to this problem. However, ICA algorithms and their implementation must be robust to interference, including outliers. Unfortunately, contamination of biomedical recordings by outliers is an unavoidable aspect in signal processing. Mihoko and Eguchi developed an outlier robust ICA algorithm, but code for this algorithm is unavailable. This paper presents a Matlab implementation of their beta-divergence for blind source separation algorithm. The implementation uses a quasi-Newton Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno (BFGS) optimization, combined with an Armijo conditioned line-search, to minimize the beta-divergence between the density of the source estimates and the product of its hypothesized marginal densities to separate a mixture of statistically independent sources. The implementation is verified by repeating the source separation simulations published by Mihoko and Eguchi. In each simulation the separation results match visually to those published by Mihoko and Eguchi

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207