MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045265907 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2010.5495889

Discriminative base decomposition for time-frequency matrix decomposition

2010· article· en· W2045265907 on OpenAlexaff
Behnaz Ghoraani, Sridhar Krishnan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNon-negative matrix factorizationMatrix decompositionPattern recognition (psychology)Discriminative modelDecompositionDiscriminantComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceTime–frequency analysisMatrix (chemical analysis)Linear discriminant analysisMathematicsComputer visionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Time-frequency matrix (TFM) decomposition using non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) has been recently considered as a successful tool for time-frequency (TF) quantification. In this paper, we modify the constraints of traditional cost function of NMF to make the method a better fit for TF quantification, and denote the new method with NMF discriminant base (NMFDB) decomposition. We evaluate the proposed method, and show that it successfully identifies the discriminant bases. Additionally, we measure the discrimination ability of NMFDB over the signals with very low discriminations, and compare it with the discrimination of the decomposed bases derived using traditional NMF. It is concluded that the proposed method is able to locate the region of difference with 20% better performance compared to the conventional NMF.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207