MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036514319 · doi:10.1109/sips.2010.5624889

A fast convergence two-step procedure for AR modeling of power spectral densities

2010· article· en· W2036514319 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Mustière, Martin Bouchard, Miodrag Bolić

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidualConvergence (economics)MathematicsGradient descentAutoregressive modelMean squared errorMinificationSpectral densityFunction (biology)AlgorithmApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationStochastic gradient descentPower (physics)Computer scienceStatisticsArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new technique for the minimization of customary cost functions for all-pole modeling of power spectral densities is presented. In the literature, optimizations are usually based on unnormalized autoregressive (AR) coefficients. In contrast, the proposed method is centered on a two-step descent using normalized AR coefficients on the one hand and the residual power on the other hand. For each cost function, efficient ways to obtain gradients are derived and a descent-based optimization is formulated. The resulting procedure converges significantly faster than the corresponding gradient descents on un-normalized coefficients, while still being computationally efficient. In addition to the traditional Yule-Walker distance, the Itakura-Saito distance, the COSH distance, the RMS log-spectral ratio distance, and a mean-squared error cost function are treated. Convergence results and curves are presented accordingly for different situations.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207