MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032782431 · doi:10.1117/12.894165

Weighted-ℓ 1 minimization with multiple weighting sets

2011· article· en· W2032782431 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMinificationWeightingRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceSignal recoveryCompressed sensingAlgorithmStructural risk minimizationStability (learning theory)Support vector machineArtificial intelligenceMachine learningPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the support recovery conditions of weighted &ell;<sub>1</sub> minimization for signal reconstruction from compressed sensing measurements when multiple support estimate sets with different accuracy are available. We identify a class of signals for which the recovered vector from &ell;<sub>1</sub> minimization provides an accurate support estimate. We then derive stability and robustness guarantees for the weighted &ell;<sub>1</sub> minimization problem with more than one support estimate. We show that applying a smaller weight to support estimate that enjoy higher accuracy improves the recovery conditions compared with the case of a single support estimate and the case with standard, i.e., non-weighted, &ell;<sub>1</sub> minimization. Our theoretical results are supported by numerical simulations on synthetic signals and real audio 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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.195 · 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