Partial-Update <formula formulatype="inline"><tex>${L}_{\infty}$</tex> </formula>-Norm Based Algorithms
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<para xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> The computational complexity of an adaptive filtering algorithm increases with increasing the filter tap length and therefore, the use of such a filter can become prohibitive for certain applications, especially for real-time implementation. In this paper, we develop low-complexity adaptive filtering algorithms by incorporating the concept of partial updating of the filter coefficients into the technique of finding the gradient vector in the hyperplane based on the <formula formulatype="inline"><tex>$L_{\infty}$</tex></formula>-norm criterion. Two specific partial update algorithms based on the sequential and <formula formulatype="inline"><tex>$M$</tex></formula>-Max coefficient updating are proposed. The statistical analyses of the two algorithms are carried out, and evolution equations for the mean and mean-square of the filter coefficient misalignment as well as the stability bounds on the step size are obtained. It is shown that the proposed partial update algorithm employing the <formula formulatype="inline"><tex>$M$</tex></formula>-Max coefficient updating can achieve a convergence rate that is closest to that of the full update algorithm. Finally, simulations are carried out to validate the theoretical results and study the convergence rate of the proposed algorithms. </para>
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it