MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998873033 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2013.6637959

MULTI-STAGE OMP sparse coding using local matching pursuit atoms selection

2013· article· en· W1998873033 on OpenAlexaff
Mahdi Marsousi, Kaveh Abhari, Paul Babyn, Javad Alirezaie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan Health AuthorityToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatching pursuitSparse approximationNeural codingComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Set (abstract data type)Basis pursuitCoding (social sciences)Artificial intelligenceK-SVDMatching (statistics)Component (thermodynamics)AlgorithmMathematicsCompressed sensingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new multi-stage approach based on component extraction is proposed to more efficiently address the sparse representation problem. In each stage a pre-set number of coefficients are chosen for reconstructing each signal component. A global search is performed to extract a lower dimensional sub-dictionary consisting of a sorted set of candidate atoms to represent the signal component, corresponding to the stage. The best representing atoms are then selected from the sub dictionary using the Matching Pursuit (MP) method. Afterwards, the sparse coefficients are updated in the same manner in which the Orthogonal Matching Pursuit (OMP) operates. The proposed method is more efficient that the conventional OMP methods. To evaluate the performance of the proposed method, it is compared to OMP and Stagewise OMP (StOMP), which are conceptually the most similar to the proposed approach. The results illustrate the proposed method is more time efficient than OMP and more robust and sparser than the StOMP.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
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

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207